Roman Delphi and its Pythian Games 9781841713830, 9781407327310

Citation preview

BAR  S1306  2004   WEIR   ROMAN DELPHI AND ITS PYTHIAN GAMES

Roman Delphi and its Pythian Games

Robert Weir

BAR International Series 1306 9 781841 713830

B A R

2004

Roman Delphi and its Pythian Games

Roman Delphi and its Pythian Games

Robert Weir

BAR International Series 1306 2004

ISBN 9781841713830 paperback ISBN 9781407327310 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841713830 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

iv

INTRODUCTION

1

Strabo and Delphi

1

Significance of thesis

4

Outline of the study

8

CHAPTER I: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ARCHAIC PYTHIAN GAMES

10

Introduction

10

First Sacred War

11

Provenance and participation at Delphi and Olympia

16

Accretion of events at Delphi and Olympia

22

Professional athletics in the 6th c. B.C.

22

Archaic athletes' catalogues and their significance

26

Professional athletics and the formation of the periodos

29

Professional musicians and politics

33

Kitharodoi

35

Aulodoi and auletai

39

Sideshow entertainments

42

Equestrian events

44

Politics and other Pythian Games

45

CHAPTER II: ADMINISTRATION OF THE PYTHIAN GAMES

49

Introduction

49

Partition between town and sanctuary

50

Administration of Achaea province

51

Damiourgoi

52

Overlap and rivalry between the two Delphis

53

Amphiktyonic epimeletai

55

Hypata and the Amphiktyonic epimeletai

58

Precursor to Hadrian's Panhellenion

61

Duties of an agonothetes

63

Catalogue of agonothetai

66

Remuneration for administrators

70

The portrait of a supposed philosopher

73 i

CHAPTER III: THE VISITOR'S EXPERIENCE OF DELPHI

77

Introduction

77

Early tourists at Delphi

77

Arriving and staying at Delphi

77

Coins of Roman Delphi

82

Delphi's appearance to the visitor

87

Inscriptions as evidence for extant structures

90

Reconstruction on the temple terrace

92

Phases of the Roman Agora

95

House for the Pythian priestess

99

Gymnasium

100

Gymnasium bathhouse

101

Reconstruction of the xystos

102

Tourist sights on coin reverses

104

Evaluation of Plutarch and Pausanias

104

CHAPTER IV: AUDIENCE AND ATHLETE AT THE PYTHIAN GAMES

108

Introduction

108

Modest benefactors of Delphi

108

Elimination of cash honoraria

109

Herodes Atticus at Delphi

110

Oil for the gymnasium

111

Intellectual appeal of the Pythian Games

111

Intellectual patronage of Delphi

113

Political intrigue at Delphi

116

Intellectuals at other Panhellenic centres

117

Training in the Delphi gymnasium

119

Painted inscriptions in the xystos

120

Other activities at the gymnasium

120

Death at the Pythian Games

121

Voice coaches

121

Victors at Roman Delphi

123

Group analysis of victors at Roman Delphi

130

Social standing of Pythian Games victors

133

Career tracks of Pythian Games victors

134

Itineraries of Pythian Games victors

136 ii

Female athletes at the Pythian Games

138

CHAPTER V: IMPERIAL INTERVENTION AT DELPHI

140

Introduction

140

The Herakles frieze

141

Nero's visit to Delphi

144

Introduction to Domitian

146

Domitian's religious conservatism

146

Domitian's benefactions and administration

146

Restoration of the Dodekaïs

149

Why Domitian aided Delphi

151

Restoration at Delphi in the 80s A.C.

152

Plutarch and the Domitianic revival

158

The kathegemon of Delphi's revival

162

Domitian and Delphi in the 90s A.C.

163

Domitian's Capitoline Games

166

Hadrian and Delphi

168

Antoninus Pius and Delphi

173

Gallienus at Delphi

174

CHAPTER VI: NEW PYTHIAN GAMES

176

Introduction

176

Epigraphic sources for the new Pythian Games

178

Introduction to the numismatic evidence

181

Pythian coins of Thessalonike

195

Pythian coins of Perinthos

199

Pythian coins of Philippopolis

201

Pythian coins of Aphrodisias

202

General characteristics of the coinages

203

Organization of Pythian Games at Ephesos

204

Organization of Pythian Games at Side

206

Sol and the Pythian Games

210

BIBLIOGRAPHY

212

iii

Acknowledgments

I gratefully acknowledge thanks to the people and organizations that have helped me to realize this project:

Roland Étienne and the École Française d'Athènes, for the free use of all their facilities at Delphi;

Evangelos Pentazos and the 10th Ephoreia of Antiquities, for access to study the inscriptions and monuments at Delphi;

William Coulson and the American School of Classical Studies in Athens, for coordinating the logistics of my research in Greece;

T.L. Shear, Jr., my principal advisor and mentor at Princeton University;

and especially Mary Grace Weir, my comfort and my joy through it all.

iv

Introduction

Introduction

Strabo and Delphi

experience as Strabo's might strike one as an impediment. Not so. In the first place, Strabo was, by his own admission, a spokesman and apologist for the Roman regime; in this respect he shared many of his peers' attitudes. Furthermore, it was Strabo's particular contention that universal rule required a knowledge of what one ruled; geographic knowledge was very much the key to successful and beneficent world rule by the Romans. Therefore, it was for the needs of statesmen and rulers, as Strabo writes at 1.1.22, that he had designed his G e o g r a p h y (in 17 books) and his Historical Notes (in 47 books, no longer extant). The surviving Geography is more than just an atlas in words with an added treatise on chartography, though it is these things too; rather, it is an encyclopaedia of what in the world is most morally uplifting, or practically useful, or memorable, or entertaining.6 Strabo himself compares his work to a colossal statue whose sum is greater and finer than its individual parts: it is to be admired more for its presentation of the immense than for its details.7

Sometime in the course of his long life (from 64/3 B.C. to A.D. 21 or later) Strabo from Amaseia near the Black Sea coast of Asia Minor set out to write a geography of the known world.1 We know nothing of Strabo but what he himself tells us. His family had been prominent in the politics of the region, even intimate with king Mithradates VI of Pontus, in the few generations before Strabo.2 He was thus born into a family of means that enabled him to travel to Lydian Nysa and, subsequently, Rome for his further education in philosophy and geography. Strabo is known to have been in Rome several times between 44 and 7 B.C., though whether for academic reasons or business is uncertain. A man of his station would never have had to work for a living, though typically the scions of prominent families undertook embassies to Rome and other diplomatic jobs on behalf of their hometowns in return for the prestige that would accrue thereby. Whatever his business, Strabo had the opportunity to indulge his geographic interests, he boasts, with one visit to Armenia and two to Egypt.3 But though he may have travelled more widely than most, he was not well travelled. Internal references suggest he actually saw very little of Italy —only what lay along the roads to Rome from Brindisium, Puteoli, and Populonia—no more in fact than where his business took him.4 Of Greece, he mentions only the Cycladic island of Gyaros as a port of call, as well as visits to Corinth and nearby Kleonai; but even these were only brief sojourns on the way to Rome in 44 or 29 B.C.5

Therefore, the Geography of Strabo is an excellent place to commence an inquiry into the relevance of Greece at the opening of the Roman Imperial period. This point of view is vital in a period when little survived of what Greece had to say for itself and a misapprehension of deepest decline has been the usual interpretation among moderns. The ideological agenda of his Geography is, paradoxically enough, good corroboration for Strabo's disinterest. Though Hellenized, Strabo was not himself a Greek and thus not liable to excessive zeal or partisan bias in his description of the Greek homeland. In particular, the account of Greece in books 8–10 is widely believed not to have relied on any first-hand experience, but was rather the product of his research and wide reading as a man of leisure and culture. For this reason, moderns have criticizd Strabo's description of Greece as superficial and merely academic, more so than his accounts of regions better known to him personally. But to be fair to Strabo and his audience, one must say that his treatment of Greece is unclouded by personal observation: what comes through clearly is the

In an age when reliable geographic information was harder to come by than our own, such a relative lack of

1

Purcell (1996), 1447. Honigmann (1931), cols. 77–78.

2

H.L. Jones (1917), xi–xiv. Strabo's maternal ancestor, Dorylaos, had been a close childhood friend of king Mithradates (10.4.10); another maternal ancestor, Moaphernes, was a governor of Kolchis under Mithradates (11.2.18). However, his paternal grandfather, Ainiates, loathed Mithradates and thus surrendered fifteen fortresses to Lucullus (12.3.13). 3

2.5.11.

4

Jones (1917), xxii.

6

However, this didactic tool was under-appreciated and underutilized for centuries (Syme [1995], 357):

5

Gyaros: 10.5.3. Corinth: 8.6.21. Kleonai: 8.6.19. Honigmann (1931), coll. 81–82; Jones (1917), xiv. Weller (1896), 84 records that he discovered, upon a close examination of the text, more than thirty instances of

There is no evidence that [Strabo] ever published the Geography. On the contrary, it seems to have lurked in obscurity for long years. The omni-vorous Pliny knows nothing of it. Athenaeus may quote the Geography for a gastronomical detail, the excellence of Spanish hams (121A; 657F): general recognition and use seem reserved for the Byzantine age [cf. Honigmann (1931), 151].

...avowed or manifest borrowing, or of mistatement in matters in which personal observation would be expected. These instances, and the vague nature of Strabo's accounts, corroborate most strongly the view of Niese ...that Strabo visited no other place in Greece except Corinth.

7

1

1.1.22–23.

Introduction

ajlla; ga;r eij" plh'qo~ ejmpivptwn tw'n peri; th'~ povlew~ tauvth~ uJmnoumevnwn te kai; diabowmev n wn oj k nw' pleonav z ein, mh; sumbh' / th' ~ proqevsew~ ejkpesei'n th;n grafh;n.

relevance Greece had for an educated outsider at the opening of the Roman Imperial period. The goal of geographical writing in the ancient world was to organize the known, physical world within a rational scheme. Since no actual maps were intended to accompany the work, this meant a picture in words that laid out the features of the world and their physical interrelations. The man-made world of cities and political boundaries took precedence over the location of seas, rivers, and mountains, a distinction that Strabo duly perpetuated throughout his Geography. Whereas details of the natural context such as soil quality or odd phenomena did have their place in his account, he laid more emphasis upon the human landscape, and its past in particular. Thus, once the cities, peoples, rivers, and mountains of a particular area have been listed and their spatial interrelationship explained, Strabo generally discusses matters of etymology, mythology, or history, especially of the Classical period. Not only is the human landscape of first priority and interest to Strabo, but his approach is admittedly armchair academic. In the introduction to his account of Greece, he in fact lays out his bibliography for the reader: Homer first and foremost as a source for both geography and history, numerous authors of geograhical monographs, historians like Ephoros and Polybios who included geographical excurses in their works, and finally both scientists and mathematicians, such as Poseidonios and Hipparchos, whose treatises contained relevant material.8

But I am reluctant to add padding by joining the crowd of those who promote this city and sing its praises, so that it does not happen that my account departs from its purpose. This statement is amplified and supported, in typically academic fashion, by a quotation from one Hegesias. Strabo refers the interested reader to the tour-guide (perihgevth") Polemon who filled no fewer than four papyrus-scroll books with his description of the votive offerings he saw on the Akropolis alone.10 The next paragraph (17) resumes the geographic thread of the whole work by mentioning in passing the mythical and historical episodes connected with a few of the 170 demes of Attika. Strabo begins with a few of the rural demes but cannot bear, despite the exigencies of his work, to forgo the lower city of Athens altogether: thus the excuse of mythological loci serves to introduce the Leokorion and Theseion sanctuaries, but lower city then disappears from the short catalogue of Athenian public monuments that follows. The subsequent paragraph (18) consists only of three sentences that derive etymologies for a number of names from Athens's earliest days in the period of legend. Strabo returns once more to topographic concerns in paragraph 19 by debating the purity of the Eridanos river: the Hellenistic poet Kallimachos had ridiculed accounts of its purity as much exaggerated but is contradicted by Strabo who says that its pure and potable sources are known in his own day; in addition, writes Strabo, the water had been just as good before Kallimachos's day, because someone had built a fountain to tap the springs in that area. Again, there is no evidence that Strabo is here speaking from personal knowledge or doing more than arguing details from divergent evidence picked up in his (no doubt voluminous) reading, a pastime much indulged in by the intellectuals of his day. With regret, he apologizes for lingering over such trivia:

Although the need to cover the whole world in his Geography proved limiting, his treatment of Athens, for instance, is quite typical of Strabo's approach and interests.9 According to the mandate he spells out in the introduction, he would have selected only the most interesting and instructive items from a welter of possible material for presentation. The first paragraph (16) deals with Athenian topography, the Akropolis in particular, in a superficial way that gives no indication that Strabo is writing from personal experience. This passage contains only what is general knowledge and the author's disclaimer that to describe all that was worthwhile would lead him too far astray:

ej n me; n ou\ n toi' ~ kaq j e { k asta, tosouv t oi" ou\sin, oujk ejndevcetai diatrivbein, ouj mh;n oujde; sigh/ ' parelqei' n , w{ s te mhd j e j n kefalaiv w / mnhsqh'naiv tinwn.

8

8.1.1. Sacks (1996), 529–530. Ephoros came from Kyme in Aeolia, flourished in the mid 4th c. B.C., and was the first to write a very influential universal history. Fragments of this history are preserved (cf. FGrH 2.70; FHG 1.234–277, 4.641–642). Poseidonios from Apamea on the Orontes (ca 135–51 B.C.) is best known as a Stoic philosopher but left writings on a wide range of topics (Kidd [1996], 1231–1232). Polybios of Arkadian Megalopolis lived ca 200–118 B.C. and wrote the history of Rome from 264 to 146 B.C. with a view to explaining to fellow Greeks the secret of Rome's success (Derow [1996], 1209–1211; Ziegler [1953], cols. 1440–1578). Large portions of his work are extant. Hipparchos the astronomer (ca 190 –after 126 B.C.) was born in Bithynian Nikaia but lived much of his life on Rhodes (Toomer [1996], 708). Only one, minor work is extant, but his influence on subsequent astronomers such as Claudius Ptolemaeus of Alexandria (fl. 2nd quarter 2nd c. A.C.) was considerable. 9

Whereas it is not permitted to spend time in the treatment of each individual item, since they are so numerous, neither is it permitted to pass them by in utter silence, so that one does not

10 Warmington (1996), 1204. Warmington (1996), 1204 (cf. FHG 3.108–148). A native of Ilion, Polemon is known from reference in the Suda lexicon, an inscription at Delphi, and a few internal references to have lived ca 220–160 B.C. His account of the Delphic sanctuary, Peri; tw'n ejn Delfoi'" qhsaurw'n (cf. Plutarch, Quaestiones convivales 675b) was completed before the inscription in 177/6 B.C. of a proxeny decree for him at Delphi (col. 1299).

9.1.16–20.

2

Introduction even pay heed to some of them in summary form.

there, one coming from the west and the other from the east.12

But he immediately relents by offering a précis of Athenian history from legendary times down to his own day in paragraph 20. Within this wide frame, Strabo's eclectic interest focuses on the decade when Kassander was king of Macedon and his vassal, Demetrios, was given Athens to rule. Here Strabo is again typical of the political outlook of many intellectuals of his day who believed the best political constitution was a democracy strongly regulated by oligarchic, and even monarchic, elements.

Greece also dominates the work by the number of books assigned to its description. For example, the much more extensive region of Asia Minor also fills books 12 through 14 with its description. Strabo of course came from Asia Minor, but even the description of his hometown and its territory occupies a single paragraph and is not disproportionately large.13 Equally vast, yet less culturally important, areas are given still less attention: book 11 alone deals with the great swath of territory that Strabo calls northern Asia (from the Crimea to Afghanistan). The reason for Greece's undue weight in the G e o g r a p h y was undoubtedly its disproportionate significance as the cultural repository of the civilized world, even still in Strabo's day.

Although Strabo does offer up the occasional tidbit of knowledge from his reading that would be otherwise lost to us, his real importance in this discussion is his reception of Greece, and of Delphi in particular. In the first place, Greece is central to his view of the world. Books 8–10 fall precisely in the centre of his Geography, being preceded by seven books that lay out the scientific principles of geography and describe the lands eastwards from the Atlantic and being followed by seven more that carry the imaginary traveller as far east as Taprobane (Sri Lanka). Furthermore, his account of Delphi, which I shall discuss next, begins at the midpoint of Book 9 and is thus at the centre of the whole work. This is unlikely to be the result of coincidence since Delphi was reputed by ancient legend to lie at the exact midpoint of the world, hence its reputation as the navel (o[ m falo") of the earth. Strabo deliberately duplicated the layout of the known world with the layout of his Geography:

Yet despite the obvious importance of Greece at this time, it is commonly thought that Strabo is a witness to its declined state. The simplest refutation is that Strabo is not a witness to Greece but to the relevance of Greece for the edification, instruction, and entertainment of his readership. Furthermore, one recent study of Strabo's account of the Peloponnese has considered his sources and marshalled sufficient, contradictory textual, epigraphic, and numismatic evidence to prove that his notion of depopulation and ruin is thoroughly anachronistic and misunderstood.14 The notion of decline and how it perhaps came to be associated with Greece will be discussed below, but for now a discussion of Strabo's treatment of Delphi will show how prominently it figured in his perception of the region. In the first place, the discussion of Delphi is more extensive than that of Athens; it also surpasses in length his description of Olympia and its games.15 The difference in treatment is due to Delphi's pre-eminence as the oracular centre of the Greek world, which had enormous impact on the course of Greek history in the Archaic and Classical periods. Thus the store of Delphic legend and literature available to Strabo was especially extensive; and nothing in his account gives any sure indication of

ÔH me;n ou\n ejpi; to; plei'on timh; tw'/ iJerw'/ touvtw/ dia; to; crhsthvrion sunevbh, dovxanti ajyeudestavtw/ tw'n pavntwn uJpavrxai, prosevlabe dev ti kai; hJ qevsi~ tou' tovpou. th'~ ga;r ÔEllavdo~ ejn mevsw/ pwv~ ejsti th'~ sumpavsh~ ...ejnomivsqh de; kai; th'~ oijkoumevnh~, kai; ejkavlesan th'~ gh'~ ojmfalovn, prosplavsante~ kai; mu'qon, o}n fhsi Pivndaro~, o{ti sumpevsoien ejntau'qa oiJ ajetoi; oiJ ajfeqevnte~ uJpo; tou' Diov~, oJ me;n ajpo; th'~ duvsew~, oJ d jajpo; th'~ ajnatolh'~, oiJ de; kovrakav~ fasi. Now although the greatest share of honour was paid to this temple because of its oracle, since of all oracles in the world it had the repute of being the most truthful,11 yet the position of the place added something. For it is almost in the centre of Greece taken as a whole, ...and it was also believed to be in the centre of the inhabited world, and people called it the navel of the earth, in addition fabricating a myth, which is told by Pindar, that the two eagles (some say crows) which had been set free by Zeus met

12

Cf. Plutarch, De Pythiae oraculis 409E, Pausanias 10.16.2, and Pindar, Pythian Odes 4.74, for this same notion. 13

12.3.39.

14

Baladié (1980), 301–320. Baladié points out that the Peloponnese had been suffering from depopulation for several centuries, which became a topos not only for Strabo but a number of subsequent authors. Polybios had initiated the topos with his description of the Roman devastation and annexation of Greece in 146 B.C. As for Strabo, the disastrous effects of the recent civil wars of 49–31 B.C. also weighed heavily. But independent evidence shows that Greece was thriving and benefitting from Roman rebuilding efforts at this time. One must also appreciate that the extinction of towns mentioned by Strabo usually means no more than that they had lost their autonomy and status as povlei" to larger political entities, not that inhabitation had ceased utterly (9.5.12).

11

Cf. Herodotos 1.48 for a very similar assessment by king Kroisos of Lydia.

15

3

Athens: 9.3.2–12. Olympia: 8.3.30, 32.

Introduction

the tomb of Neoptolemos is found in the sacred precinct also.25 In the same vein of religious rites, Strabo moves next to discussion of the Pythian Games —indeed he is one of the few ancient sources to discuss them in any detail— though his attention is taken by the details of certain musical contests rather than any aspect of the equestrian or athletic events we know to have existed;26 but this interest is not surprising in view of the very great renown in which the musical and dramatic contests of the Pythian Games were held. Finally, in the last two chapters of the account, Strabo diverges from Ephoros's account, which he names as his primary source for Delphi, and takes him to task at some length for inserting mythical characters such as Apollo and Python from the foundation story of Delphi into a real historical context, thus conflating the two genres.27 His skepticism of mythology qua history, as opposed to its allegorical value for ethical instruction, confirms Strabo as a man of education and a man of his time. The remaining five sections in his chapter of the Phokis region necessarily treat the towns, rivers, and mountain passes of that region in a cursory manner and lack the scholarly enthusiasm devoted to Delphi.28

personal autopsy. Although the use of present and perfect tenses at 9.3.4 in reference to the temple of Apollo, the treasury buildings, and the rich votive offerings might suggest a first-hand knowledge of Delphi, this is never made explicit, and it more likely originated from a guidebook to the site, possibly Polemon's, which Strabo consulted for Athens.16 Here, as with Athens, Strabo would have chosen from a much larger store of Delphic material what he considered of the most benefit to the Greco-Roman governing class of the Empire to know.17 After an introductory passage on the general topography of the whole Phokis region and its peoples, Strabo violates geographic order by describing Delphi before Elateia, the major city in the region: 18 since the previous sections of Book 9 have worked westwards from the Isthmus across Attica and Boiotia to the Phokis border, it would have been more logical to start with eastern Phokis before coming to Delphi in the west. An exception is here granted out of consideration for Delphi's famous temple of Pythian Apollo and its oracle, which, Strabo reminds his reader, was consulted by no less than Homer's Agamemnon.19 The account of Delphi begins with a description of its immediate neighbourhood, which includes the towns of Kirrha and Krisa on the sea, below Delphi.20 This naturally leads in the next paragraph to mention of the ancient struggle of Delphi for independence from control by the federal league of Phokian towns and for a territory of its own.21 The reason for Delphi's celebrity, what would have made it a coveted prize for the Phokian confederacy, was its oracle and the advantages of its central location, both of which Strabo then expounds upon.22 Strabo next explains how the sanctuary and its resources were administered by the Amphiktyony, a board of delegates from cities all over Greece.23 Strabo's source in this passage is reasonably up-to-date, for he indicates that the Amphiktyony, like the Achaean League, was dissolved, probably by the Romans, sometime after their annexation of Greece in 146 B.C. The following paragraph recounts the impoverishment of Delphi through looting and is a passage generally, and erroneously, considered to be an indication of the sanctuary's state of deep decline in Strabo's own day.24 Then Strabo proceeds to mention the three constructions of the temple of Pythian Apollo that stood at Delphi in various ages and to explain why

In short, one has the impression from Strabo's account that Delphi still loomed large as a repository of culture and knowledge in the educated consciousness of the Augustan period: its importance (if not its temple fortunes) remained undimished in the new world order of Rome. In Strabo's case, this impression cannot necessarily be correlated with the actual state of Delphi, for he was never likely there, and this must by evaluated by other means. Be that as it may, the continued interest in Delphi did not remain merely scholarly but soon brought real change and benefit to the place when the role of the emperors of Rome as patrons to the world crystallized fully in the 1st c. A.C. In this kindly environment, Delphi flourished in the first three centuries A.C. as magnificently as ever, yet in a different way suited to the changed circumstances. This metamorphosis is the essence Roman Delphi, but it could equally be applied to several communities in Greece during this time. Significance of thesis The purpose of this monograph is to alleviate in some little way the gloom and cobwebs of neglect that have obscured the on-going vitality, and even relevance, of Greece once Rome had come to dominate the known world. This goal will be realized by shedding light upon Delphi, which, after the full and vivid glare of Archaic and Classical history, has hitherto been only fitfully illuminated. Certain dark lacunae are

16

9.1.16.

17

1.1.22; cf. 1.1.16–18.

18

9.3.1.

19

9.3.2.

20

9.3.3.

21

9.3.4.

25

22

9.3.5–6.

26

23

9.3.7.

27

9.3.11–12. Attack on Ephoros: 9.3.11.

24

9.3.8.

28

9.3.13–17.

4

9.3.9. 9.3.10.

Introduction unavoidable, but this study will furnish a more evenhanded account where the evidence best allows it. On the subject of the renowned Pythian oracle, for instance, little will be said since nothing of substance can be contributed to the debate at this point without some windfall of fresh information. Suffice it to say that the oracle continued to function into the Christian era, but that its particulars are still as opaque as ever.29 Where the available evidence permits a more useful contribution is in the description of something less uniquely associated with Delphi, her Pythian Games.

because a notice that they ceased would have been more conspicuous. I shall argue against such a murky supposition for the games at Delphi. The games did continue and, more importantly, were a means of continuity for Delphi. This was because the Pythian Games were more than just sports or talent contests but religious festivals too; as such, they performed a social function that lent stability and continued relevance in the later centuries and new political structure of the Roman Imperial period. The games were a regular pulse through the centuries that belied rumours of lapse, decline, and demise. For that thousand years best known to us from the surviving documentation as mutable and eventful, the regular rhythms of religion offered stability for many of the people most of the time. This does not mean that the Pythian Games remained static —any institution is bound to adapt to changed circumstances in the course of a millennium— but rather the following chapters will demonstrate how this venerable fixture of a venerable land adapted to its environment. In a more general sense, this study is a refutation of the notion of decline as applied to Delphi in the Roman Imperial period.

The Pythian Games were a sacred festival of athletics, horsemanship, music, and drama that were held at or near the Delphic sanctuary once every four years over slightly more than one thousand years of Delphi's existence (ca 580 B.C. to A.D. 395). The Pythian Games were second only to the (nowadays betterknown) Olympic Games in most respects, but the latter never included regular events for dramatic or musical performers. The Olympic and the Pythian Games are less privileged and more significant when one realizes that they were but two, albeit two of the most prestigious and durable, out of hundreds of similar local, or regional, festivals that were held at regular intervals in the millennium between the emergence of Greek states into the historical record in the Archaic age and the intolerant hegemony of the late 4th c. A.D Christians.30

The nature of decline is so subjective that its allegation, once imputed, can rarely be refuted to the satisfaction of all. One might argue in every case that persons or institutions carry with them from their very inception the seeds of dissolution, or that decline is selective and sets in at different times in various aspects of an entity at the same time that other aspects are at their prime or have yet to reach it. But degrees of decline, in a specific sense (leaving aside the exact definition of the term), can often be distinguished and legitimately maintained with objectivity. The biological model of institutions with a rise, a peak, and a fall is old-fashioned and in fact liable to misapplication. Decline is frequently what we call change when it confronts innate human conservatism, and its bad moral connotations result from our own misgivings. And so it is a natural outgrowth of the human outlook that the present has never been as good as the past; but the corollary is that the good, old days never actually existed.

The history and archaeology of such festivals have been largely ignored until recently; and even the ancient Olympic Games, to which the largest single share of bibliography has been devoted, have frequently been utilized for foisting modern ideas of sportsmanship and amateurism upon the ancient Greeks, rather than as a subject of investigation, per se. Study of the Pythian Games has been exiguous by comparison, even for the years of Delphi's heyday during the 6th and 5th c. B.C.: indeed, the Pythian Games have not been the subject of a monograph since 1841.31 Since that time, archaeological investigations at Delphi and elsewhere have of course turned up a great deal of new material. Indeed, the general perception of the Pythian Games in scholarship does not extend beyond note of their regular occurrence and division of intervening time into four-year Pythiads; one generally supposes that with the advent of the Roman Empire these games continued, but only

These things are well known, but their application to Greece in the post-Classical period has only lately been made. Might such an idea have been reasonably excusable during the Hellenistic and Roman periods when the centres of political power had moved into a wider world and far from the old land of Greece whose states were the hapless pawns of kings or generals? No, this notion of the loss of political control is flawed. In the first place, to assert that Greece in the earlier periods of history possessed a political make-up in some way superior to what came later is simplistic and misleading, if not demonstrably illusory. In fact, it was the romanticization of Athens's fortunes that formed this belief. Such a simple thesis does not take into

29

For the Pythian oracle under the Empire, see especially Plutarch's three dialogues De E apud Delphos, De Pythiae oraculis, and De defectu oraculorum. Secondary literature includes Athanassiadi (1989–90), Levin (1989), Fontenrose (1978), Amandry (1950), Parke (1939b), and Flacelière (1938). 30

Ringwood-Arnold (1927) discusses 150 lesser, non-Attic agonistic festivals from the Greek mainland and adjacent islands, excluding Euboia: as a rule, they were common in Boiotia, Arkadia, and Lakonia, but rare in Thessaly and northwest Greece. For a more modern study of all the evidence for a games cycle of regional importance in Thessaly, see Gallis (1988), 217–235. 31

Krause (1841), passim.

5

Introduction families of the Empire, it is true that by this time the Greeks had become as Romanized as the Romans Hellenized.

account that the scores of autonomous political units within modern-day Greece were at odds —and at war— with one another throughout the Archaic and Classical periods. Alliances did exist but seldom lasted. And the unity of all states against a common enemy was unknown. In disunity there was weakness: the majority of Greek states were small and never possessed of much clout at any time in their history. Indeed, it was only after the Classical period, in the Hellenistic age characterized by great kingdoms and empires, that individual states commonly banded together in leagues with stable memberships to attain common political and religious goals. Organizations such as the Aetolian League, the Achaean League, or the Amphiktyonic League may be distinguished as the first manifestations of a Greek national identity. The perceived loss of political power by individual Greek states was not so much that as it was an increase in the magnitude of political power in the world outside Greece with the advent of vast and enormously wealthy empires in the Hellenistic age. The diminution of power was thus more relative than actual. In addition, it was seldom that the empires interfered in the local politics of most Greek states. At first, the coming of the Romans meant just one more empire in the equation; but later, only the Roman Empire still remained for the states of Greece to interact with. Like its predecessors in the East, the Roman administration did not as a rule concern itself with the exercise of local politics or infringe upon local autonomy. In very schematic terms, this is the process that has been misnamed the decline of Greece.

To return to the decline of Delphi, Strabo is frequently pressed into service to illustrate the nadir of the sanctuary's fortunes in the late 1st c. B.C. At 9.3.8 he writes that at the present time the sanctuary at Delphi is very impoverished, as far as money is concerned, but that of its votive dedications some have been taken away though most still remain.32 If he writes from personal observation at Delphi, he does not make it clear, neither here nor elsewhere (though Strabo is usually quick to boast of what he has seen). It is surely more likely that he was following a source, probably the same source that he follows for all of 9.3.8. The above sentence, when taken in its proper context, is explained by what follows on the wealth of Delphi in ages past and its successive lootings by Phokian generals during the Third Sacred War (355–347 B.C.). These incidents are familiar to us from extant portions of the 1st c. B.C. historian Diodoros of Sicily;33 but he is known to have based books 11–16 of his universal history on the work of Ephoros, a 4th c. B.C. historian, which is now almost entirely lost.34 In the case of the passage at hand, Strabo must have derived his material for 9.3.8 from the same source as Diodoros 16.56.7–8, namely Ephoros, since both extant authors tell the same story, with a number of the same particulars, of how some Phokians attempted to dig into the foundations of the Apollo temple for buried treasure but were stopped by divinely-sent earthquakes. Furthermore, Strabo's heavy reliance on Ephoros for his account of Delphi has already been noted.35 Therefore, the above statement of the Delphic sanctuary's, or temple's, poverty that is often cited to prove the depth of Delphi's decline by the late 1st c. B.C. in fact refers to the mid 4th c. B.C. Strabo's statement that the sanctuary is at present very poor (nuniv gev toi penevstaton) is either taken directly from Ephoros or is Strabo's own estimation of the current situation based upon his reading of Ephoros. Indeed, it did take half a century to rebuild the temple of Apollo after its collapse in 373/2 B.C.; in addition, the Phokians' spoliation of the sanctuary's more liquid assets, including a number of votives of gold or silver, in the Third Sacred War not only denuded Delphi visibly for years to come but also delayed further the temple's rebuilding. Despite a heavy indemnity that was later laid on the Phokians for their sacrilege, inscriptions record the tiny sums in obols and a few

There are various reasons for this attribution of decline, but principal among them is the nature of postClassical Greek history, which is more complex and less epically romantic, thus more like the experience of one's own period and quite unlike the fondly-imagined days of yore. The perceived unity of the Classical period was fragmented after Alexader's expansion; and the single path of narrative forked in many directions, no one of them any longer clearly dominant over the rest. A few centuries later, Roman conquest reassembled the pieces, but it was Rome's particular narrative that carried on the great theme of history. The city-states of Hellenistic Greece fell into a complex gulf between these two unities, though one or other of them might occasionally resurface to play a cameo role in a larger drama. But the Greeks of Greece did not resignedly slide into obscurity; they actually aided and abetted events by striving to create a homogeneous class of nobility that included all Greeks, the Hellenized kings and aristocrats in Asia, and (eventually) their Roman overlords. As might be expected, there was initially much resistance to this fusion, but Strabo was typical of the new order then coalescing. He was ethnically half-Asian but considered himself a Hellene, and as such was no doubt extremely proud of his polis and active in its business; but he was also a brother to those in the Roman governing class. Among the prominent

32

nuniv gev toi penevstatovn ejsti to; ejn Delfoi'" iJero;n crhmavtwn ge cavrin, tw'n dæ ajnaqhmavtwn ta; me;n h\rtai, ta; de; pleivw mevnei.

33

See Diodorus Siculus 16.30.1–2 (plunder by Philomelos, 354/3 B.C.), 16.56.3–57.2 (plunder by Phaÿllos and Onomarchos, 347/6 B.C.), and 16.78.3–4 (plunder by Thrasios, 340/39 B.C.).

34

Barber (1970), 388: "Our knowledge of Ephorus largely depends on the fact that he was the chief source of Diodorus books 11–16, whose abridgement follows him very closely (see fr. 191)."

35

6

9.3.11–12.

Introduction drachmai that pilgrims to Delphi contributed towards the building project.36 When Ephoros died in ca 330 B.C., the temple was still incomplete, and he could justly have written of Delphi's extreme lack of capital. The Phokian looters had of course despoiled the most precious of the dedications, as Ephoros no doubt recorded, but the others remained to clutter the sanctuary for centuries.

the sanctuary of Delphi still preserves intact what once made it great; and the reason that one might not think much of the sanctuary (wjligwvrhtai... to; iJerovn) could be its relative unimportance in international affairs after the 5th c. B.C. If one insists that to; iJerovn can only be the temple of Apollo, the sense may be modified somewhat: either it means that the temple is lightly esteemed because it (the one completed in 327/6 B.C.) was aesthetically inferior to its predecessor, possibly because it was wholly of limestone and did not have a marble facade; or it means that Strabo has closely followed Ephoros here (as at 9.3.8) in an allusion to the still-unfinished state of the temple after its predecessor's collapse in 373/2 B.C. In any case, this passage is another that cannot corroborate the notion of utter decline in Strabo's own time, since it refers to a state of affairs three hundred years earlier and has no bearing on Delphi's later condition, whatever that was.

Another text is also adduced to prove Delphi's decline, but usually without citing the whole passage:37 wjligwvrhtai dæ iJkanw'~ kai; to; iJerovn, provteron dæ uJperballovntw~ ejtimhvqh: dhlou'si dæ oi{ te qhsauroiv, ou}~ kai; dh'moi kai; dunavstai kateskeuvasan, eij~ ou}~ kai; crhvmata ajnetivqento kaqierwmev n a kai; e[ r ga tw' n aj r iv s twn dhmiourgw'n, kai; oJ ajgw;n oJ Puqiko;~ kai; to; plh'qo~ tw'n iJstoroumevnwn crhsmw'n. The temple, too, has been much neglected, though in earlier times it was held in exceedingly great honour. Clear proofs of this are the treasure-houses, built both by peoples and by potentates, in which they deposited not only money which they had dedicated to the god, but also works of the best artists; and also the Pythian Games, and the great number of the recorded [sic] oracles.

The thesis of this monograph is, to borrow from Mark Twain, that the rumours of Delphi's death have been greatly exaggerated. The chapters that follow will show otherwise by argument of how Delphi in fact thrived in the Roman period. As there is yet no monograph dealing with Roman Delphi, I have been at liberty to choose whatever particular avenue of inquiry seemed most profitable at this very important site. As already indicated, I have chosen to explore Delphi from the point of view of the festival of the Pythian Games. This is a topic that is mercifully quite limited in terms of previous bibliography (almost none) and concision of relevant material, almost all of which has been published by members of the École Française d'Athènes in either its journal Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique or in the Fouilles de Delphes series. But this does not mean that study of the Pythian Games is an exclusive field with little wider interest. All scholars, even archaeologists, usually work with previously known material but the originality of their work lies in how they use these materials, particularly the questions they ask of them. In this respect my research has benefited from the relative lack of interest in Delphi of the Imperial age by its French excavators; on the other hand, the interest in Roman Greece is a newly burgeoning field in Britain and North America, for whose readership I hope this study will hold some interest. However, the occasion of the Pythian Games and the activity of the several parties involved in them are a nexus for a number of important themes. In its own small way this study will address issues such as social climbing, patronage, professional athletics, and the importance of cultural heritage in the Roman Imperial world. Delphi may never have been a centre of much political consequence in the Roman Imperial period, but we will see that it was not a shadowy relic of the past either.

That Delphi is no longer what it used to be is unequivocal, but the above translation for the first portion of the text is inaccurate and misleading on two counts. In the first place, the noun iJerovn could equally well refer to the sanctuary as a whole, not just the temple, and perhaps should be taken in this way. Secondly, wj l igwv r htai means rather it is lightly esteemed. These corrections make better sense in light of what follows than temple and has been much neglected do, for the sentence continues with the adversative but previously it was held in exceedingly great honour; this is then proved (dhlou' s i) by the treasuries, the Pythian Games, and the throng of oracular responses being inquired after (to; plh'qo~ tw'n iJstoroumevnwn crhsmw'n —present participle, not perfect). The grammar indicates that whereas the money and objets d'art laid up in the treasuries are no longer present at the time of writing, the treasuries themselves, the Pythian Games, and the functioning of the oracle do still continue. The logic and the point of the whole passage in the Greek thus require that the treasuries, the Pythian Games, and the oracular responses are all components of the iJerovn at its outset. As we have already seen, Strabo discusses the looting of the sanctuary by the Phokians in 352 B.C. at 9.3.8; and the allusion must be the same here. The point of this passage in 9.3.4 is that despite the loss of the most intrinsically valuable items at some intervening time,

36

Maass (1993), 26: CID II, 1 col. II, 5 col. I.

37

9.3.4.

Happily, the available evidence from Delphi and comparanda from elsewhere, as well as existing work 7

Introduction exporting the Pythian Games to dozens of cities in the Balkans and Asia Minor at that time.

by noted scholars such as the epigrapher Louis Robert, all mean that a number of the issues raised can at least be clarified, if not answered to the full satisfaction of all. The chronological limit that the evidence will support runs roughly from the early 1st c. A.C. through the mid 3rd c. A.C., though most of what will be presented dates to a space of about a century from the time of Nero (A.D. 54–68) to that of Antoninus Pius (A.D. 138–161). The relevant evidence is most often inscriptional, though recourse to ancient literary sources and modern excavation reports is frequently had; occasionally, architectural or numismatic considerations come into play as well.

The concern of powerful outsiders to influence what happened at Delphi was not new or unique to the Roman Imperial age. For this reason, as well as to provide a foil for later developments in the subsequent chapters, it seemed best to devote the first chapter to the political intrigue surrounding the foundation of the Pythian Games in the early 6th c. B.C. This chapter also discusses what brought athletes and musicians of those early years to participate in these games and, therefore, the place of Delphi within the 6th c. B.C. coalescence of both a formal games circuit (perivodo") and the notion of Panhellenism. In retrospect, the political, administrative, and performance elements of the Pythian Games will not be seen to have changed radically by the time of the Roman Imperial period: Delphi was always one phrase in the definition of that cultural identity common to all who called themselves Greek. It is this later picture that the subsequent chapters investigate by pursuing the various experiential aspects of the Pythian Games in greater depth.

I have also had the good fortune to benefit from the freedom to study all their materials that was kindly granted to me by the École Française d'Athènes and by the 10th Ephoreia of Classical and Byzantine Antiquities at Delphi during the period of August, 1994 through February, 1995. Thanks to this licence, I happened upon some unpublished inscriptions that have had an influence on this study. The publication of these inscriptions' texts is of course the due right and responsibility of the scholars of the École Française d'Athènes whose exposition of Delphic epigraphy over the past century has been exemplary. But it would run counter to the spirit of scholarship to suppress all mention of texts that have bearing, as I see it, on the study of Roman Delphi. With the number of epigraphic fragments recovered at Delphi since the 1890s now nearing 20,000, it would be surprising indeed for none of them have escaped notice. I hope that my own observations will draw the attention of seasoned epigraphers, whom I would be equally glad to have confirm or refute my opinions: bringing all the Delphic texts into the light is of course much more important than who has said what about them.

The second chapter takes up the mechanics of administration over the sanctuary and its games. The games' management involved a web of competing claims between the polis and the sanctuary of Delphi on one level, and, on a higher level, between an imperial administration desiring control of an important cultural institution and the ambitions of a local aristocracy. Equilibrium was achieved to the satisfaction of posterity in that most diplomatic of Roman ways, by giving each party a measure of the importance it sought. The imperial administration maintained a hidden and infrequent initiative whose execution was catered by a co-opted elite. The Amphiktyony afforded a particular outlet for competition and demonstration with the designation in the Imperial period of an epimeletes and agonothetes from among its number. Under imperial guidance, the Amphiktyony assumed in the 1st c. A.C. a number of the features that characterized Hadrian's Panhellenic League of the next century; and cooperation within the system was rewarded chiefly within the context of Delphi's games. Those who benefited most from positions of new influence were the leading citizens of Thessalian Hypata, under whose influence Delphi had lately come.

Outline of the study The overall picture is one of general continuity nuanced by several specific changes peculiar to the exigencies of the Roman Imperial period. The continuity of the games is evident, for instance, in their significance as a means to a political end, whether in the days of Kleisthenes or of Commodus. Whereas the Pythian Games were more than just contests, they were those as well; and one can see a striking degree of continuity between the professional athletes at Delphi in the Archaic age and their 3rd c. A.C. colleagues. The ways in which the Pythian Games changed under the Empire were all ultimately attributable to the emperor and the needs of imperial ideology. For instance, the desire of Augustus to exercise control over the Amphiktyonic League that administered the Delphic sanctuary led to the creation of a new administrator specifically in charge of the Pythian Games. Another example is that the increasing identification of the emperor's person with the solar deity in the late 2nd–3rd c. A.C. was the reason for

The next chapter deals with the visitor's experience of Delphi at the time of the games. This rubric includes matters of tourism at Delphi, the number of visitors expected to attend the Pythian Games, and the logistical network in place to receive them. But the main emphasis is on the physical state of Delphi during the Roman Imperial period as a function of the town and sanctuary's continued vitality. The invaluable evidence of both Plutarch and Pausanias is combined with architectural remains to suggest that the sanctuary 8

Introduction continued to be well maintained and even received embellishment, particularly between A.D. 80 and 130. Subsequent building projects indicate that whereas this had been the high-water mark of Roman Delphi, there is no reason to believe that decay ensued, or the enthusiasm of those in power waned, before the late 4th c. A.C.

Greece is well known, it is now possible to connect his participation in the Pythian Games of A.D. 67 with a flattering gesture made by the Amphiktyons in the theatre. The first emperor to take an active and continued interest in the fortunes of Delphi was Domitian, to whom credit should be give for Plutarch's famous description of Delphi's efflorescence. Both he, and Hadrian after him, also intervened in the conduct of the Pythian Games by passing edicts to preserve what they perceived as the original independence of the games from any regional interests (i.e. the Thessalians of Hypata). Delphi's games were thus worthy of preservation and support from the highest level. But such sentiments did not always remove the Pythian Games from strictly imperial propaganda, as a letter from Antoninus Pius instructing special commemo-rations of his predecessor Hadrian at the games makes clear.

In Chapter IV, one sees the reasons for audience and athlete to attend the Pythian Games in the Roman Imperial period. People came to festivals ut videant et videantur, and the popularity of the Pythian Games ensured numerous opportunities for being observed. Among the spectators this chapter selects major benefactors and intellectuals for closer scrutiny. The stadium built by Herodes Atticus at Delphi, as the single greatest example of private philanthropy toward Roman Delphi, is an example of the importance of these games among the other agonistic festivals of Greece that puts them on par with the great agonistic festivals at Athens that Hadrian had sponsored. Groups of intellectuals in attendance at these and the other Panhellenic festivals had another role to play, for a place such as Delphi afforded them the opportunity to meet one another, trade ideas, and engage in networking. The contestants too were dedicated to putting on a good show, and of course to winning if at all possible. Contemporary literary accounts and a recent find of graffiti from the Delphi gymnasium show how earnest they could be to secure a prestigious Pythian crown; and numerous inscribed catalogues indicate how proudly athletes from all over the Mediterranean esteemed such a symbolic victory over and against more lucrative ones elsewhere.

The sixth and final chapter takes the Pythian Games beyond Delphi to the cities of the eastern Empire as a last demonstration of the place and importance of Delphi within the Roman Empire. A few sanctioned grants of the Pythian name to agonistic festivals outside of Delphi had first occurred in the Hellenistic period, but these paled by comparison with a deliberate program of over two dozen such franchises granted between A.D. 180 and 260. Inscriptions reveal continuity with the original Pythian Games as regards their status as sacred games (iJeroi; ajgw'ne") and their contest programmes; and numismatic allusions likewise suggest a consistency of symbols and rituals among all the new games. In those cases where we are best informed, the foundation of new Pythian Games was a political act associable with the emperor and his ideology. But even in these instances, age-old Delphi and her games, as a crucial manifestation of Apollo and his prowess, derived new vitality and significance from the increasingly Apolline identity of the imperial person in the 3rd c. A.C.

The fifth chapter resumes more consistently a common theme of Chapters II–IV, the influence of the emperor and Rome on Delphi, by discussing a few episodes of direct impingement by an emperor upon the Pythian Games. Although the concert tour of Nero through

9

Chapter I

Chapter I: the Significance of the Archaic Pythian Games

Introduction

Catherine Morgan has studied the earliest centuries of the Delphic sanctuary and concluded that its oracle became a focal point for interstate interest and visitation before ca 700 B.C.39 But it was in the early 6th c. B.C., in the aftermath of a crucial power struggle for control of Delphi, that its new administrators founded there a festival (panhguriv") on the Olympic model to commemorate their victory; and it was this development, not the oracle, that marked the beginning of Delphi's period of greatest influence. Whatever the political expedients behind it, a panhguriv" was by definition a religious festival to honour the local god and might, or might not, include contests (aj g w' n e"); but it could not be without a sacrifice (qusiva) to the god.40 The Pythian festival was a panhguriv " that included the optional games. As such, it was commonplace —Pindar's epinician odes name a few dozen such festivals— but what made them crucial was the special, inter-state status of their venue, as Morgan has made clear. Once Kleisthenes of Sikyon had realized how he might capitalize from the use of Olympia as a model, it was he who disappointed the Thessalians' hopes of control by setting the Delphic festival on a higher trajectory. He helped give form to the nascent concept of Panhellenism and applied it to the Pythian Games, which resulted in a complex nexus of cultural activity that endured for a millennium. Whereas the rest of this monograph will explore the later centuries of this phenomenon, this first chapter will focus on the circumstances of its institution and the flavour of its early days. Besides its usefulness in exploring a phase of Delphi's existence that falls largely outside the scope of Morgan's seminal work, it will serve as a point of comparison for Roman Delphi and its Pythian Games.

The Archaic age, as peopled by the colourful tales of Herodotos and others, was an exciting period in the political history of the Greeks. Nor was it any less innovative in the arts, letters, or sciences. Just as a comet's cold kernel warms, melts, and blazes with light the closer it swings to the sun from the remote obscurity of space, so too do the nebulous affiliations known as Greek civilization first enter the full glare of history in the 6th c. B.C. after their Dark Age, the first tepid inklings of the 8th c. B.C., and the still obscure 7th c. B.C. The significance of the 6th c. B.C., what it owed to its past, and what it bequeathed to its future have long been, and are, studied with great profit; and this chapter seeks merely to amplify the principal theme of this scholarship by elucidating the foundation and early history of the Pythian Games in the 6th c. B.C. Festivals such as the Pythian Games invariably had a political dimension; and this chapter will open and close by considering this factor as it applied to the games' formation after the First Sacred War and its ramifications for Hellenistic Delphi. The second section of this chapter will compare the popularity of the newly-founded Pythian Games with that of the already long-established Olympic Games by examining patterns of athletic participation at both sites in the 6th c. B.C. Comparison with Olympia leads in the next section to a more general consideration of professional athletics and their cultural place in the Archaic period, which contributed, it is argued, to the formation of a formal circuit (perivodo") of Panhellenic games by ca 500 B.C. The evolutionary process is fleshed out through exposition of the careers of those athletes and musicians who came to Delphi in the early years. Whereas athletes had been touring and competing in Greek festivals, particularly at Olympia, for some time already, the coalescence of a formal circuit was of particular relevancy for the musicians. The instigation of the Pythian Games in the early 6th c. B.C. occurred early in a process that brought musicians out of the shadowy symposiastic context and into the bright scrutiny of a public audience, an evolution which Delphi's games both facilitated and formalized.

The significance of the Pythian Games in its early decades is a rubric that includes the political circumstances of their foundation and the extent of their appeal at this time, as compared with the Olympic Games. Among the few available facts concerning the conduct of the Pythian Games, particularly in the 6th c. B.C., are the names, ethnics, and dates of some of the athletes and musicians who came to Delphi. Scrutiny of the literary sources has resulted in compilations of this information that present to us fragmentary reconstructions of their careers. But studies such as Moretti's, Knab's, and Klee's have begged the obvious question of professionalism;41 and this chapter will present the evidence for a predominant participation in

The oracle at Delphi was the most renowned in the ancient world, but the importance of the quadrennial Pythian Games ought not to be underestimated either: by the mid 4th c. B.C., if not earlier, these games were hailed by one Athenian as the common denominator of all Greeks (to;n koino;n tw'n ÔEllhvnwn ajgw'na).38

39

Morgan (1990), 161–190.

40

Amandry (1990), 301.

41

38

Moretti (1957), later supplemented by idem (1970). Knab (1934). Klee (1918).

Demosthenes 9.32.

10

Chapter I the early Pythian Games by full professionals. Similarities in the provenances of Pythian victors and of Olympic victors will suggest the early Pythian Games were already perceived as comparable to the earlier festival before the formalization of the Panhellenic circuit late in the 6th c. B.C.

introduced en bloc to the victory games of 591/0 B.C., and subsequently to the regular series of Pythian Games. However, it is clear from later Sikyonian building activity at Delphi that tyrant and sanctuary enjoyed a cozy relationship. One can be certain that agonistic festivals, whether created or reincarnations of older institutions, did serve contemporary political purposes, though not necessarily those of just tyrants. The Isthmian Games, for instance, were first celebrated in 580 B.C., only a few years after the last of the Kypselid tyrants was expelled from Corinth and the city's constitution fell under the control of a Dorian mercantile class.45 The Nemean Games were first celebrated in 573 B.C., under the initial administration of Kleonai on the edges of both Argive and Sikyonian territories, and, because of their strong Dorian content, as an affront to Kleisthenes during his war against Argos.46

First Sacred War The Pythian Games were a legacy of the First Sacred War.42 Kleisthenes the tyrant of Sikyon was instrumental in the process, though his exact policies and aims are open to various interpretations.43 Upon his return home after the war with his one-third share of all the spoils, Kleisthenes used this wealth to institute Pythian Games at Sikyon.44 Whatever else this gesture may have meant, it is probable that these games consisted of the same contests as were 42

Càssola (1980). passim. The term First Sacred War is a modern invention for the sake of convenience: the ancients called it the Krisan War (Kallisthenes 124J: Krisaiko;" povlemo"; Strabo 9.3.4, 418 and 9.3.10, 421: Krisai'o" povlemo"). The names Krisa and Kirrha are interchangeable and denote the same city, which has provided occasion for much confusion in the literary sources: the former was its original name, which it changed at the time of the First Sacred War (Càssola [1980], 424–430, 433; Pausanias 2.9.6, 10.37.5–8). Its site is uncertain, but likely candidates are the on the sea coast, either the hilltop now called Xeropigado (Càssola [1980], 430–435) or Moulki (Morgan [1990], 118, 135). The single best study of this war is Forrest (1956). Robertson (1978) later argued that it was an invention of the mid 4th c. B.C., but Càssola (1980) and others, such as Lehmann (1980) and Tausend (1986), have soundly refuted him. But whether or not the First Sacred War existed is not especially relevant to the subject at hand: if the war never occurred, it later became necessary to invent it to explain the Delphic sanctuary's evolution beyond the regional context to an inter-state significance with Amphiktyonic administration (Morgan [1990], 135–136).

In the case of Delphi, a number of late sources recall an earlier, enneateric festival (held every eight years), which may or may not have actually existed.47 Indeed, Plutarch, an undoubtedly well-informed priest of Apollo at Delphi, writes that prehistoric Delphi had no fewer than three immediately consecutive festivals on an enneateric cycle, the Septerion, Herois, and

45

McGregor (1941), 281–282.

46

McGregor (1941), 277–278.

47

Literary sources of the Roman Imperial period and later inform us that the enneateric festival was so ancient as to have been celebrated in the time of the Trojan War (Eustathios, Od. 1.125; scholiast on Homer, Hymns 3.267), and that such luminaries as Orpheus (Suda e.3585; but cf. Pausanias 10.7.2), Homer, and Hesiod (Pausanias 10.7.3) came to Delphi to participate in it. See the cited texts from Pausanias and the Pindaric scholia below (cf. Censorinus De die natali 18). The list of prominent participants in the enneateric festival is of course apocryphal and, writes Levi (1971), 421 n.42, "...In general this discussion is an explanation of the absence of great and legendary names from the Delphic records." As for the existence of the enneateric festival, see Morgan (1990), 136–137 (cf. Mosshammer [1982], 30):

43

The chronological reconstruction by McGregor (1941) of Kleisthenes's career as tyrant is entirely credible, given the few facts at our disposal; so is the quite different interpretation of Mosshammer (1982). Even the best-known Archaic tyrants are shadowy characters of anecdote and cannot bear too heavy an evidentiary burden. 44

Scholiast on Pindar, Nemean 9, preamble. (Drachmann [1927], 149–150): peri; tw'n ejn Sikuw'ni Puqivwn oJ ÔAlikarnaseu;" [Herodotos 5.67?] ou{tw gravfei: ...fhsi; de; ejn tw'/ polevmw/ tw'n Krisaiv w n kata; qav l assan rJ a / d iv w " ta; ej p ithv d eia porizomevnwn kai; dia; tou'to makra'" ginomevnh" th'" poliorkiva", Kleisqevnhn to;n Sikuwvnion nautiko;n ijdiva/ paraskeuavsanta kwlu'sai th;n sitopompivan aujtw'n, kai; dia; tauvthn th;n eujergesivan to; trivton tw'n lafuvrwn e[ d osan tw' / Kleisqev n ei kai; Sikuwniv o i". aj f æ ou| kai; Sikuwvnioi ta; Puvqia prw'ton paræ eJautoi" e[qesan.

There is no evidence of any earlier events [prior to 582/1 B.C.], although some informal artistic celebration associated with the worship of Apollo would be both possible and likely. Pierre Amandry, in the only recent study of the Pythian Games, assumes that the traditions of a pre-Amphiktyonic festival are historical ([1990], 281). Given the well-attested tradition of kitharodic performances in 7th c. B.C. Sparta and elsewhere, there is no need to dismiss out-of-hand the mentions of similar festival performances, if not formal contests, at pre-Amphiktyonic Delphi. It is one thing to allege that Homer or Hesiod performed there —later claims to is-Olympian celebrity for Delphi, one suspects— but to disregard notices of visits by historical persons such as Terpandros of Lesbos as well is excessively cautious. The antique priority of an earlier kitharodic performance in Apollo's honour would go far to explaining the eponymous quality of this event after the Amphiktyons' self-conscious and so-called revival in the early 6th c. B.C. (cf. Herington [1985], passim for an excellent survey of all the literary and artistic evidence for the performance of Greek poetry before ca 400 B.C.). For more on kitharody, see below.

Concerning the Pythian Games in Sikyon, the man of Halikarnassos writes as follows: …and he says that seeing as the Krisaians had easy access to supplies by sea, and seeing as the siege was a long one for this reason, that Kleisthenes the Sikyonian outfitted a fleet at his own expense and closed off the Krisaians' food supply. And because of this benefaction, they gave to Kleisthenes and the Sikyonians one-third of the booty, after which the Sikyonians also set up Pythian Games at Sikyon for the first time. Pindar is the first source to attest these games at Sikyon (Olympian 13 andNemean 9), and allusions by pseudo-Plutarch imply that they included kitharodic and aulodic contests (De musica 1132A, 1134B).

11

Chapter I Charilla.48 However, the dramatized flight of Apollo to Thessalian Tempe for absolution that was enacted at the Septerion might indicate that the festival was in fact an Amphiktyonic invention at about the time of the First Sacred War.49 When assigning a festival with an already considerable pedigree to the prehistoric past, not even Plutarch would have had access to other than sanctuary traditions.50

itself. After their capture of Krisa, the Amphiktyons and their allies established new contests, which now apparently included new events such as aulos-playing. Hypothesis Pythiorum a.52 ...kai; ajpokteivna~ ªoJ ∆Apovllwnº to;n o[fin to;n Puvqwna ajgwnivzetai to;n Puqiko;n ajgw'na kata; eJbdovmhn hJmevra: (Here follows an explanation of the components of Apollo's musical performance.)53 ...meta; de; tau'ta Krivsh~ ktisqeivsh~ ejpi; tw'n stenw'n th'~ ejpi; tou;~ Delfou;~ ajgouvsh~ oJdou', kai; polla; tw'n Krisaivwn ejrgazomevnwn ejpi; tou;~ ”Ellhna~ kai; ajposulouvntwn tou;~ ejpi; to; crhsthv r ion badiv z onta~, oiJ ∆Amfiktuv o ne~ eJ l onte~ th; n Kri' s an meta; tw' n a[ l lwn summav c wn kai; kuv r ioi auj t w' n genov m enoi dievqhkan e{tera ajgw'na, ejn w/J' kai; aujlhtai; hj g wniv s anto. oiJ de; to; n gumniko; n aj g w' n a nikhvsantev~ eijsin oi{de, o{te ∆Apovllwn e[qhke Puvqia, ejn tw'/ tou' Puvqwno~ ajgw'ni: Kavstwr stavdion, pu;x Poludeuvkh~, dolico;n Kavlai>~, oJ p liv t hn Zhv t h~, div s kon Phleuv ~ , pav l hn Telamwvn, pagkravtion ÔHraklh'~: ou}~ tw'/ futw'/ th'~ davfnh~ ejstefavnwsen.

The literary sources for the foundation of the historical Pythian Games in the early 6th c. B.C. are as follows. Pausanias says simply that in the third year of the 84th Olympiad the Amphiktyons established contests of kitharodia, which had previously existed, of aulodia, and of aulos-playing. Pausanias 10.7.4.51 th'~ de; tessarakosth'~ oj l umpiav d o~ kai; oj g dov h ~, h} n Glaukiv a ~ oJ Krotwniavth~ ejnivkhse, tauvth~ e[tei trivtw/ a\qla e[qesan oiJ ∆Amfiktuvone~ kiqarw/diva~ me;n kaqa; kai; ej x aj r ch' ~ , prosev q esan de; kai; aujlw/diva~ ajgwvnisma kai; aujlw'n:... More extensive accounts come from the scholiasts' introductory comments on Pindar's Pythian Odes. The first scholiast recounts how Apollo competed in a Pythian contest shortly after slaying the serpent Python. The mythological victors of the laurel wreath for the athletic events at this first Delphic festival are catalogued (for instance, Kastor won the stadion race, Polydeukes the boxing, and Herakles the pankration). The scholiast also describes how the Krisaians precipitated war with the Amphiktyony by abusing pilgrims to Delphi and even robbing the sanctuary

The other scholiasts focus their comments on Eurylochos the Thessalian who not only led the allied forces againsts the rascally Kirrhaians/Krisaians but regain to reacquire the Pythian festival, possibly for his own, or Thessaly's, benefit (e . g . katapolemhvsa~ Kirraivou~ ajnekthvsato to;n ajgw'na tou' qeou' ... w/[ceto ajnakthsovmeno~ to;n ajgw'na). This festival of his included both the kitharodia of yore and new musical events (aulodia and aulos-playing), though athletic contests are not mentioned. The scholiasts also note that the festival was celebrated after an allied success over the Kirrhaians/Krisaians, but only about midway through the First Sacred War, since the Thessalian general Hippias was still besieging the remaining enemy on Mount Kirphis. This suggests a thanksgiving festival for a military victory, which may explain why cash prizes were given for the first and only time at Delphi.

48

Quaestiones Graecae 293B–F; for the Septerion see also De defectu oraculorum 418A–B and Aelian, Varia historia 3.1. The principal reference by Plutarch to these three festivals might be understood to mean that they were celebrated, during his lifetime, on three successive days: trei'" a[gousi Delfoi; ejnnaethrivda" kata; to; eJxh'" (the Delphians observe three nine-year [sc. festivals] one right after the other). Although the rites and significance of the second festival, the Heroïs, were secret and largely unknown to him, the Septerion and Charilla were both ritual atonements for the wrongful deaths at prehistoric Delphi of the serpent Python and of the girl Charilla.

Hypothesis Pythiorum b.54 a[llw": hJ uJjpovqesi~ tw' n Puqiv w n. Euj r uv l oco~ oJ Qessalo; ~ katapolemhvsa~ Kirraivou~ ajnekthvsato to;n ajgw'na tou' qeou': oiJ de; Kirrai'oi lh/strikh/' ejfovdw/ crwvmenoi ejfovneuon tou;~ parabavllonta~ eij~ ta; tou' qeou'. periegevneto de; aujtw'n ej p i; a[ r conto~ ∆Aqhv n hsi me; n Simwniv d ou, Delfoi'~ de; Gulivda. oiJ me;n ou\n Kirrai'oi eij~ th;n parakeivmenhn tw/' Parnasw/' Kivrfin o[ro~ aj p ev f ugon, o{ s oi dh; kai; perileifqev n te~ ejtuvgcanon. katalipw;n de; oJ Eujruvloco~ ejnivou~ tw'n Qessalw'n meta; ÔIppiva tou' strathgou', w{ste tou;~ uJpoloivpou~ ceirwvsasqai, w/[ceto ajnakthsovmeno~ to;n ajgw'na, kai; dh; tou'ton crhmativthn movnon e[qeto. meta; de; crovnon eJ x aeth' katagwnisamev n wn tw' n meta; tou'

49 Plutarch, Quaestiones Graecae 293C, De defectu oraculorum 418B. 50

This is not to suggest that sanctuary records were themselves particularly corrupted; sanctuaries like Delphi were in fact the chief repositories of literature and cultural artifacts in the Archaic period.

51

This passage is somewhat at odds with 10.33.8, where Pausanias says that it was the Amphiktyony that founded the Pythian Games, (ta; Puvqia) thus implying an alternate tradition to the enneateric festival: touvtw/ tw'/ lovgw/ diavfora me;n ejn th'/ ÔJHrodovtou suggrafh/', diavfora dev ejstivn aujtw'/ kai; o{sa ejpi; tai'" nivkai" tai'" Puqikai' " mnhmoneuv o usin: ∆Amfiktuv o ne" ga; r Puv q ia ejtivqesan prw'ton, kai; Aijcmeva" Parapotavmio" pugmh;n ejnivkhsen ejn paisivn:

The account of the Pythian Games that Pausanias recounts at 10.7.2–8 was most likely received by him in this very form at Delphi, perhaps from the inscribed catalogue of Aristotle and Kallisthenes (Miller [1979], 139–144, 148–150; see also below page 13).

12

52

Drachmann (1910), p. 2, lines 8–9, 16; p. 3, line 4.

53

Cf. Strabo 9.3.10, Pollux 4.84.

54

Drachmann (1910), p.3 line 5 –p.4 line 2.

Chapter I ÔIppiva tou;~ uJpoleleimmevnou~ tw'n Kirraivwn, ejpi; me;n ∆Aqhvnhsin a[rconto~ Damasivou, ejn de; Delfoi'~ Diodwvrou u{steron kai; stefanivthn e[qento katorqwvsante~. to;n de; Eujruvlocon nevon ejkavloun ∆Acilleva, wJ~ Eujforivwn iJstorei' (fr. 53 Mein.):

historical games' foundation with the Amphiktyonic college. I suspect that Pausanias is more technically correct in this instance than the scholiasts whose interest is more inclined to the single figure of Eurylochos; but both accounts can be reconciled by supposing a very close relationship between the league and the military command. Eurylochos may already have been an Amphiktyon who took charge of the effort to wrest Delphi from Kirrhaian control; or, he came to be considered an Amphiktyon, ex officio.

oJplotevrou tæ ∆Acilh'o~ ajkouvomen Eujrulovcoio, Delfivde" w|/ u{po kalo;n ∆Ihvi>on ajntibovhsan ãKri'sanà porqhvsanti, Lukwrevo~ oijkiva Foivbou.

Thus, one cannot but wonder if this enneateric festival was not recast —if not invented wholesale— to suit the ideology of the newly founded Pythian Games. It is not out of the question that an invented claim of Amphiktyonic legitimacy combined with vilification of the Kirrhaians may have incorporated earlier topical legends.57 Indeed, the only reference to Apollo's institution of a festival for the dead serpent Python that predates the Roman period is to be found in Aristotle, who may have heard this story while he and his nephew, Kallisthenes, were engaged in their compilation of a catalogue of Pythian victors at Delphi.58 Even the locus classicus for the story of how Apollo came to Delphi, killed Python, and started his cult there, the Homeric Hymn to Apollo, makes no mention of a festival or funeral games for the serpent.59

movnwn de; kiqarw/dw'n ajgwnizomevnwn to; palaio; n ej p oiv h sen oJ Euj r uv l oco~ kai; ta; e{ t era uJpavrcein ajgwnivsmata. Hypothesis Pythiorum c.55 ...ej t elei' t o de; oJ aj g w; n katarca; ~ me; n dia; ej n naethriv d o~, ªe[ k tisan de; to; n aj g w' n a oiJ ∆Amfiktuv o ne~ Eujrulovcou tou' Qessalou' qevnto~ aujto;n,º metevsth de; eij~ pentaethrivda... Hypothesis Pythiorum d.56 a[llw~: to;n Puqiko;n ajgw'na dievqhken Eujruloco~ oJ Qessalo;~ su;n toi'~ ∆Amfiktuvosi tou;~ Kirraivou~ katapolemhvsa~ wjmouv~ tina~ o[nta~ kai; biazomevnou~ tou;~ perioivkou~, ejpi; a[rconto~ Delfoi'~ me;n Gulivda, ∆Aqhvnhsi de; Sivmwno~. kai; nikhvsa~ e[ q eto crhmatiko; n aj g w' n a: crhv m asi ga; r mov n oi~ tou; ~ nikhv s anta~ ej t iv m wn, ou[ p w stefavnou o[nto~. e[qeto de; ajgw'na kiqarw/diko;n w{sper kai; provteron, prosevqhke de; aujlhth;n kai; auj l wdov n : kai; tou' tw' n ∆Amfiktuov n wn strateumato~ aj n acwrhv s anto~ oj l iv g oi perieleivfqhsan, w{ste th;n Kivrfin diaporqh'sai: hJgei'to de; tw'n perileifqevntwn ÔIppia~ oJ Qessalov~. kai; e[tei e{ktw/ meta; th;n th'~ Kiv r ra~ a{ l wsin aj n ekhv r uxan tw/ ' qew/ ' to; n stefaniv t hn, ej p i; Diodwv r ou me; n a[ r conto~ Delfoi'~, ∆Aqhnhsi de; Damavsido~. ajntivkeitai de; ejk meshmbriva~ tw/' o[rei tou' Parnasou' Kirrai'on pedivon kai; o[ro~, o} Kivrfin kalou'sin, ejn w|/ mevso~ oJ Plei'sto~ fevretai potamov~. kai; o{ti Eujruvloco~ oJ Qessalo;~ tou;~ Kirraivou~ ejpovrqhse, marturei' kai; Eujforivwn:

Even if the enneateric festival had actually existed, it was in any case nothing like the later Pythian Games, which quickly evolved after the First Sacred War, because it comprised no more than a single event, a kitharodic contest, whose performers recalled in music and song how Apollo slew Python to claim Delphi for himself.60 Two late accounts relate that by the 6th c. B.C this contest had become the exercise in virtuosity of a prescribed order of movements that made up the formal Puqiko; " nov m o"; however, this may be a

57

Lines 532–535 of the 6th c. B.C. Homeric Hymn to Apollo do seem to reflect the Amphiktyonic outlook after the First Sacred War: hjev ti thuvsion e[po" e[ssetai hjev ti e[rgon u{bri~ qæ h} qevmi~ ejsti; kataqnhtw'n ajnqrwvpwn. “Alloi e[peiqæ uJmi'n shmavntore~ a[ndre~ e[sontai tw'n uJpæ ajnagkaivh/ dedmhvsesqæ h[mata pavnta.

oJplotevrou tæ ∆Acilh'o~ ajkouvomen Eujrulovcoio.

The existence of an alternate tradition concerning the origin of the Pythian Games has already been mentioned (see above, note 51).

The institution of the historical Pythian Games in the early 6th c. B.C is attributed to Eurylochos the Thessalian —the Amphiktyonic League was largely Thessalian at the time— and is sometimes represented as a refoundation of the prehistoric festival that Apollo had initiated to expiate his slaying of Pytho but was disrupted by the First Sacred War. Pausanias, our best literary source for the history of the Pythian Games, does not mention Eurylochos, the grand commander of all the allied forces, in connection with the games' foundation; instead, he unequivocally associates the

55

Drachmann (1910), p.4 lines14–16.

56

Drachmann (1910), p.4 line19 –p.5 line 8.

58 Aristotle, Fragmenta varia: Historica 8.50, fr. 637 . Catalogue: Plutarch, Solon 11.1; 83F. Diogenes Laertios 5.26; Scholiast on Pindar, Olympian 2.87e; FD III.1.400. For more recent bibliography on the Delphic inscription, see SEG 17.233 and Spoerri (1988), 111–140. 59

3.244–546. Each of the four Panhellenic games came at some point to be associated with the expiation or placation of a wrongful death (Eusebius, Praep. evang. 2.6.10; scholiast on Pindar, Isthmians: Hypothesis a).

60

Strabo 9.3.10. Ovid, Metamorphoses 1.446–447. Clement of Alexandria Protrepticus 1.1.2–3, 2.34.1. Eustathius, Ad Iliadem 1.84, 4.637. Scholiast on Pindar, Pythians: Hypothesis a–b, and sch. mos. 70.1–2 (Drachmann [1910], 3–4). Plutarch however denies that Apollo ever did battle Python and says it is only a tale that dramatists have adopted (De defectu oraculorum 417F); cf. Aelian, Variae historiae 3.1.

13

Chapter I

essentially pointless.66 More to the point is the context in which the Amphiktyony founded (or at least refounded) the Pythian Games as a Panhellenic festival after they had wrested control of the Delphic sanctuary from the local interests of the Phokian Kirrhaians in the First Sacred War.67

confusion for the renowned aulos nome invented by Sakadas.61 If not, it was a later development that was inspired by the success of Sakadas's nomos.62 At any rate, there is no good evidence that kitharodes were restricted to performing this story in the Pythian Games of the 6th c. B.C. In addition, if a musical festival was indeed celebrated at Delphi prior to the First Sacred War, it was of no more than limited, and merely local, appeal, only one festival among many. By contrast, the Pythian Games, as organized in the 580s B.C., included a much wider array of events from its beginning and attracted a wider following from early on. But tradition was respected, since the victor in the kitharodes' contest was the eponym who gave his name to a particular Pythiad, just as the winner in the one-stade race at the Olympic Games did for any given Olympiad.63

The Amphiktyonic league had no direct involvement with Delphi before the First Sacred War; and its control of the sanctuary and its activities was a direct result of that conflict. Originally, the Amphiktyony was the federation of a few politically minor states in central Greece (Malis, Lokris, and Phthiotis) that met annually at the ancient sanctuary of Demeter Anthela in the Thermopylai pass. By the end of the 7th c. B.C., at the latest, its membership had expanded to include Phokis, Doris, Boiotia, the Ionian cities of Euboia, and most especially Thessaly, whose voting weight dominated the whole body: 68

All our sources agree that the first stephanitic Pythian Games (i.e. for which a crown was the victor's prize) occurred in 582/1 B.C. and that it was preceded a few years earlier, after a success against the Kirrhaians in the First Sacred War, by a set of games whose prizes were of real, intrinsic value. Pausanias counted this earlier, chrematitic festival as his first Pythiad.64 Pausanias is the only surviving source unequivocally to locate the first Pythiad in 586/5; and it is not impossible that the Marmor Parium (whose testimony is usually considered to be at odds with Pausanias's) might also have mentioned a non-stephanitic contest in that year too.65 But since the ancients did not reckon chronology according to four-year Pythiads, the old debate —resumed again in the past few decades—over whether 586/5 or 582/1 counted as the first Pythiad is

61

For it is a fair guess that by the end of the seventh century the Amphiktyony was no more than an instrument of Thessalian policy. It was the desire of Thessaly to expand its interests south into central Greece that contributed to the outbreak of the First Sacred War for the prize of Delphi.69 Literary and archaeological evidence suggest that since the inception of the Delphic oracle in the mid 8th c. B.C., the place had made a name (and a fortune) for itself that tempted the ambitious leaders of Thessaly.70 But Thessaly with its Amphiktyony in tow was not alone in its estimation of Delphi's potential, since the Phokian town of Kirrha lay near the sanctuary and naturally expected to exploit this windfall. Kirrha was well-sited to benefit from any pilgrims approaching Delphi by way of the Corinthian Gulf, whence most of the long-distance traffic surely came, rather than overland.71 George Forrest has

Athenaios 12.54.33; Hyginos Fab. 273.7. See below, note 247.

62

Pollux 4.78 implies that there was another Puqiko;" novmo" besides the auletic one: tou' de; Puqikou' novmou tou' aujlhtikou'... 63

Mosshammer (1982), 17–18 correctly points out that Pythiads, unlike Olympiads, did not denote the four-year stretch between one Pythian Games and another, but merely the occasion of these games' celebration at Delphi. A few sources (especially Pausanias and the Pindaric scholiasts) do refer to victories by athletes and performers in the xth Pythiad, but this is exceptional and does not mean that an alternate chronology based on Pythiads was in common use alongside the Olympic one. Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that lists of Pythian victors were accessible outside of Delphi itself, so any such system of chronology would be of necessarily limited value. 64

Mosshammer (1982), 29.

65

Mosshammer (1982), 18:

66

Mosshammer's article, the most recent (and in my opinion, most satisfactory) on the subject, reasserts the orthodoxy of a 582/1 date that has prevailed throughout most of the 20th century following the publication of POxy II.222 (Grenfell and Hunt [1899], 85–95), which preserves scholiasts' notes on Pindar's Olympian 9.17c and 12 inscr. The 586/5 date has been argued, primarily from Pythiad references in the Pindaric scholia, by Bennett (1957), 61–78 and, in more detail, by Miller (1978), 127–158. However, Miller admits that his arguments from the scholia are largely inconclusive (138: "The situation is thus not completely clear...,"). Given the very equivocal nature of his sources, his arguments often seem too ingenious to be credible.

The point of disagreement between the Parian and Pausanias is not whether the Pythian era should be dated to 586/5 or 582/1, but whether the chrematitic festival was celebrated in 591/0 or 586/5. The Parian might well have agreed with Pausanias that the festival of 582/1 was the second Pythiad in the plain and literal sense that it was the second celebration of the Pythian games. The question to be asked of those who enumerate Pythiads is not the date of the Pythian era, but whether they began the count with the first stephanitic celebration or with an earlier chrematitic festival. Pausanias assigned the number 1 to the chrematitic games.

67

Forrest (1956), passim.

68

Forrest (1956), 42.

69

Forrest (1956), 42–44. Thessaly had sought to become a power to the south of its borders ever since the Lelantine War.

70 71

Morgan (1990), 134–147.

The oracle's early appeal in Greece was principally southwards, to the major political centres in the Peloponnese in particular. The first of the many treasuries to be erected within the sanctuary was in fact that attributed to Kypselos, tyrant of Corinth in the 7th c. B.C. (structure #308 on the French state plan of Delphi, Bommelaer [1991], 153–155).

14

Chapter I plausibly hypothesized that the oracle, acting on behalf of Kirrhaian interests, had incautiously provoked the Alkmeonidai of Athens and Kleisthenes of Sikyon toward the end of the seventh century.72 But the motivation of simple greed ought not to be underestimated. One scholiast's note preserves the notion that the legendary Akrisios of Argos founded a Delphic Amphiktyony to rival the Amphiktyony at Thermopylai.73 Whether or not Delphi belonged to a rival organization of this sort, it is Forrest's observation that the different casus belli alleged in the literary sources do indicate a common element of Kirrhaian interference in the sanctuary in one form or another, even if they are compromised by mid 4th c. B.C. anachronisms.74 It is also significant that the leaders of the Sikyonian and Athenian contingents (Kleisthenes and Alkmeon respectively) were both men whom the oracle had slighted before the war, which was itself a fair excuse for war among the proud aristocrats of the time.75

the historical war was no less sketchy than the received tradition regarding the other. He undoubtedly had no clear knowledge of how long the First Sacred War had lasted but still intended to cast it as the epic struggle that gave birth to modern Delphi. The siting of the Pythian Games in the 6th c. B.C. also smacks of post-war propaganda. The kitharodic performances of Terpandros to honour Apollo in the 7th c. B.C. were held at Delphi, probably on or near the ”Alw" where the available space would have been sufficient to accommodate this relatively humble event.78 But from 591/0 until ca 275 B.C., when a natural ravine northwest of the Apollo temenos was filled to provide an area sufficiently large and flat for the construction of Delphi's first stadium, the Pythian Games in fact took place on the coastal plain of the Pleistos river effluent.79 There were good practical considerations for siting the festival at a location several kilometres' remove from the precipitous topography of the sanctuary itself. Indeed, insufficient level ground was surely the reason that the Pythian hippodrome never moved from the plain below Delphi. Convenient sea access to the plain was another advantage if the games were held there. One version of the Apollo-Python myth has it that the god cast the serpent's body into the Pleistos River valley to rot ( p u q e i ' n ). The story was not necessarily an Amphiktyonic fabrication; but if it was genuinely traditional, it was undeniably convenient to their ideology as well, and it would thus have been encouraged. The coastal plain had originally belonged to Kirrha; but the Amphiktyons later gave it over to the sanctuary as a possession of Apollo, thereby demonstrating their own triumph over the vanquished polis that had dared to usurp Delphi. The first Amphiktyonic games of 591/0 were, after all, victory games to commemorate the taking of Kirrha, and its booty did furnish their prizes. By retaining this venue for the Pythian Games, the Amphiktyony reiterated their symbolic control long after the original circumstances of the gesture.

The exact circumstances of the coalition are necessarily uncertain, but the Thessalian contingent dominated, whether by reason of its size or its primacy in the Amphiktyony.76 Immediately following the capture of Kirrha in 591/0, the Thessalian commander, Eurylochos, instituted a one-time set of games with prizes of war booty to commemorate this event. These were the first surely-attested games that one might call ‘Pythian’, and were certainly the paradigm for the true, stephanitic Pythian Games that commenced in the year 582/1. The victory games of Eurylochos were also what Pausanias considered the first Pythiad of the Pythian Games, though he erroneously dated them to 586/5 because he calculated back from the games of 582/1 with the four-year interval that became canonical after 582/1.77 If we are to believe Kallisthenes's account of the First Sacred War, as obtained at second hand, the struggle continued for another six years of mopping-up and guerrilla actions on the slopes of Kirphis, across the Pleistos valley from Delphi, and thus endured for ten years in all (594/3–585/4 B.C.). Since the victory games had already been celebrated and Eurylochos had resigned the high command of the allied forces to his deputy Hippias, the war's tide had already turned, and the remaining hostilities were no doubt infrequent and of low intensity. Not only does ten years seem unusually long for the war's duration, but the very number of ten years is suspiciously reminiscent of the Trojan War. Possibly the information at Kallisthenes's disposal for 72

The shift in venue uphill to Delphi for most events was thus a logical way for the Aitolian League to demonstrate its newly assumed hegemony in the 270s B.C. The move was only one part of an extensive programme of new construction and new rites designed to substantiate the Aitolians' claim after the Gallic incursion of 279 B.C. as saviours (and thus deservedly masters) of Delphi and, by extension, of all Greek culture. Inscriptions and numismatic finds at

Forrest (1956), 34–42.

73

Forrest (1956), 43 and n.4; scholiast on Euripides, Orestes 1094 (cf. Strabo 9.3.7, 420). 74

Forrest (1956), 44–45.

75

Forrest (1956), 36–42.

78

Roux (1976), 166–171. Plutarch, Quaestiones Graecae 203C, De defectu oraculorum 417F, and De musica 1136A. For the celebrated treasure of 6th c. B.C. material excavated under the Sacred Way where it crosses the ”Alw", see Amandry (1939). 79

For instance, Pindar, Pythian 10.22–23 and 11.20 locates the athletic victories of Thrasydaios and Hippokleas in the region of Kirrha: "...e[qhke kai; baquleivmwn uJpo; Kivrra" ajgw;n ⁄ pevtran krathsivpoda Frikivan," and, "...ajgw'ni te Kivrra"...," respectively.

76

For the question of the coalition's composition, see Tausend (1986). 77

10.7.3. Mosshammer (1982), 18, 29.

15

Chapter I

The Pythian Games were influential in inter-state society in much the same way as the Delphic oracle, which either extended or withheld Apollo's sanction but was not actively involved in running states' foreign affairs.85 It has been suggested that the four Panhellenic Games came into existence to supply the aristocrats of newly emerging poleis with a forum for competition and interaction and thus functioned as a means of self-definition. Indeed, the creation of the Pythian, Isthmian, and Nemean Games all within a decade of each other in the 580s and 570s B.C. suggests that they did fill some arising need. One thinks, for instance, of the Panathenaic festival first instituted by Peisistratos in 566/5 B.C. and the political ideology behind that creation. This hypothesis is plausible, but not the whole truth: all these festivals were "...expressions of mass interests and not just political manipulations by individual leaders."86 The model of purely aristocratic competition takes no account of the professional athletes and performers who toured from one set of games to another. It may also be anachronistic to give a weight and priority to the four festivals later called Panhellenic at the expense of myriad other 6th c. B.C. festivals, of which the Greater Panathenaia is the best known87.

Delphi all witness the Aetolian domination of the sanctuary throughout most of the Hellenistic period.80 But once the First Sacred War ended, the rewards anticipated by the Thessalians did not in fact materialize, since they did not gain a place in the political domination of central Greece as a consequence. Instead, the extension of Amphiktyonic membership to Athens and Thebes and their subsequent domination of that league diluted the influence of Thessaly over Delphi. Thessalian wars against Phokis later in the 6th c. B.C. are evidence of this frustrated ambition.81 The Pythian victors of 582 B.C. in the four-horse chariot race was Hippias, the lieutenant of Eurylochos; but the victors attested at subsequent Pythian Games do not include many Thessalians. Central Greece and the Peloponnese were much better represented instead. The next attested Thessalian victor at Delphi was one Phrikias from Pelinaion, who won in the men's long-distance race (dovlico"), perhaps in 506 B.C.82 Provenance and participation at Delphi and Olympia Catherine Morgan's recent monograph has suggested a plausible model for the evolution of Delphi, beginning in the 8th c. B.C., from an oracular centre of local pretensions to a well-known facilitator of constitutional evolution in the emerging poleis of the Archaic age.83 Concurrent with the sanctuary's waxing importance was its adornment of the sanctuary —no stone temple or temenos wall existed before the mid 7th c. B.C.—84 and an archaeological record of votives with increasingly varied provenances. The same basic pattern had held true for the Olympia sanctuary, though its inception was earlier(10th c. B.C.) than Delphi's (mid 9th c. B.C.). The ramifications of Morgan's seminal study are legion and help to set the stage for the later growth of game festivals at both Olympia and Delphi.

85

Fontenrose (1978), 239: What effect or influence did Delphi have upon the Greek states? If we look through genuine responses we must say that it had no direct and active influence upon them; it took no initiatives in Greek affairs: Delphi did not send Sparta to war against Athens —Sparta was already determined to make war and sought Delphic confirmation (H5 [Thucydides 1.118.3, 1.123.1, 2.54.4, 431B.C.]). When the Pythia told all Spartan clients to free Athens (Q124 [Herodotos 5.63.1, 6.123.2, ca 510 B.C.]) she was telling them what the Athenian Kleisthenes had paid her to tell them. Even in the narrative tradition the Delphic Apollo makes little attempt to affect the policies of cities; he simply speaks the truth when asked for it.

86

Kyle (1992), 78.

87

The locus classicus for Hellenism as defined by one's cultural affiliations (e.g. attendance at one of the four Panhellenic festivals), not by one's ethnicity, is Isokrates, Panegyric 50. As regards Archaic festivals elsewhere, we all too often have only passing references in Pindar to give some idea of their lost richness (cf. Gardiner [1937], 37–39 for a brief survey and Gallis [1988] for a local festival at Larisa).

80

For the Aitolian hegemony of Delphi, see the standard works of Nachtergael (1977) and Flacelière (1937a).

81

Forrest (1956), 46–47. Herodotos 8.27. Pausanias 10.1.3–10.

82

Klee (1918), 77–78, #20. Pindar, Pythian 10.20–27. In 498 B.C., his son Hippokleas won the boys' divaulon (two-stade race) at Delphi (Klee [1918], 78, #21; Pindar Pythian 10.14). 83

Morgan (1990), 161–190, 203–212.

84

Morgan (1990), 132–133:

Of the countless local festivals that sprang up everywhere in the sixth and fifth centuries we know little beside their names. From the lists of victories enumerated by Pindar it is clear that every state had at least one athletic festival and states like Athens and Sparta had many. Moreover, at these festivals some of the competitions were open to athletes from all parts. The prizes were tripods or other objects of value...

I can find no convincing evidence for temple construction in the sanctuary area at Delphi before the mid seventh century at the earliest. Various attempts have been made to assign cult functions to earlier structures, but the evidence is extremely tenuous. ...Comparison with [the first temple of Poseidon at Isthmia and the temple of Apollo at Corinth] would therefore suggest a date for the Delphi temple of between 650 and 600, and indeed, since the tiles indicate a hipped roof, it is unlikely to be later. Consequently, it is quite possible that the first temple of Apollo predated the Heraion at Olympia, and was thus a very early development by the standards of inter-state sanctuaries.

He goes on to mention a 6th c. B.C. bronze bowl from Kyme in Italy, now in the British Museum (Inv. 163) that is inscribed, ∆Epi; toi'" ∆Onomavstou tou' Feidivlew ajqloi'" ejqevqhn. One is reminded of the bronze tripod that Hesiod, a century or more earlier, won at the funeral games of Amphidamas at Chalkis in Euboia (Works and days 654–658), and his mention of athletes proudly carrying their prizes home to show to their parents (Theogonia 435–438). Besides these, we have other fragments of inscribed bronze vessels that were prizes in games that date to the 7th and 6th c. B.C. (Jeffery [1990], 91–92,

16

Chapter I In addition, one should not uncritically accept the notion that the circuit (perivodo") of the four, canonical Panhellenic Games sprang into being along with the creation of the last of its constituents, the Nemean Games, in 573 B.C.:88

did not live nearby actually chose to avail themselves of this right. The only indication we have of international participation at the games comes from what we know of the victors' provenances. In this instance, it must be assumed that those who won were a fair cross-section of those who came to the games. This information is more complete for the Olympic Games but much less so for the Pythian, Isthmian, and Nemean Games.90 The earliest two centuries of the Olympic Games are sufficiently well documented to show that few athletes came to Olympia from outside the Peloponnese: the victors' list for the 8th and 7th c. B.C. is dominated by Eleans, Messenians, and most especially Spartans.91

The national character of these four festivals seems to have been recognized from the first, nor was it ever challenged. They were, par excellence, the Panhellenic festivals, the sacred games, the games of the crown. They formed a cycle (periv o do"), and the highest distinction that an athlete could win was to be a victor in all four Panhellenic games. ...The founding of three new Panhellenic festivals within a few years and the immediate recognition of their national character are signs of a change that was taking place. Hitherto the story of Olympia and of Greek athletics has been one of natural growth, the sixth century is the age of athletic organization. This view has long been cherished, but I wish to suggest a somewhat haphazard process of evolution into the canonical perivodo" of the Greek world of four originally regional, if not local, festivals that readily lent themselves to this exploitation. Thus, it would be anachronistic to endow these festivals in the 6th c. B.C. with the same significance that they later acquired. What came to distinguish festivals such as the Olympic and Pythian Games by the Classical period was their Panhellenism, i.e. their accessibility to anyone of Greek ethnicity, a criterion which included more and more of the ancient world after the conquests of Alexander. But the extent of this accessibility in their earliest days is uncertain. The first pronouncement of the Olympic Games' accessibility to all Greeks occurs in Herodotos, in the context of an anecdote set in the early 6th c. B.C.89 It could be that the Olympic Games were theoretically open to all Greeks, but that few who

94): two inscribed rims of lebetes from Thebes, ca 700–675? and ca 625–600? B.C.; another, from Helikon, ca 625–600?; five more, from the Athenian Akropolis, ca 700–600? B.C.; and two further lebes fragments dedidicated at Delphi, 7th c. and ca 550? B.C. (also in Claude Rolley, Fouilles de Delphes. Vol. 5.3. Les trépieds à couve clouée, Paris, 1977, #267–268); "Normally the bowl bore two inscriptions; the first (inscribed by the donor) commemorated the actual games: tw'n ejpi; tw'/ dei'na a[qlwn eijmiv, or: oJ dei'na mæ e[dwken ejpi; tw'/ dei'na a\qlon: the second was dedicatory, added by the prizewinner when he duly offered his prize in some sanctuary," (91). That these prizes were greatly esteemed is proved by the grave marker of Damotimos of Troizen (ca 550–525) whose epigrammatic inscription indicates that the stone pillar was surmounted by the bronze tripod that he had won in a contest at Thebes (176, 181: E. Legrand, "Inscriptions de Trézène," BCH 17 [1893], 85): Damotivmoi tovde sa'ma fivla Ûergavsato mavter ∆Aªmºfidavma: ouj gar pai'de" ejni; megavroi" ejgevnonto. ⁄ kai; trivpo" ˙o;n Qevbassi qevo–n e[nike ª...ca 14... mnºe'mæ ajgaqe'": ejpevqeke de; paidiv. 88

90

For the Olympic Games, see especially Moretti, (1957) and (1970), who incorporates and supplements the earlier work of Rudolf Knab (1934) and Klee (1918). For the three other festivals, one is obliged to supplement the antiquated work of Krause (1841), 85–104 with Klee (1918), passim, Knab (1934), passim, and more recently published archaeological material, especially the Fouilles de Delphes series in the case of the Pythian Games. Despite these measures, their victors' lists do not approach the completeness of the Olympic one, which is more the result of the short-shrift paid them by the literary sources than the unbiased witness of chance epigraphic finds.

Gardiner (1930), 37.

89

Herodotos 2.160: oiJ de; ª∆Hlei'oiº e[fasan kai; sfevwn kai; tw'n a[llwn ÔEllhvnwn oJmoivw" tw/' boulomevnw/ ejxei'nai ajgwnivzesqai.

91

17

Moretti (1957), 59–67, #1–76

Chapter I

Graph1.1: Provenance of Victors, 6th c. B.C. 60

50 Unknown W. Asia Minor

40

Italy Sicily

30

Balkans Aegean islands

20

N. Greece Central Greece

10

Peloponnese

0 Olympic stadionikai

Olympic Games

Isthmian Games

Nemean Games

Pythian Games

Graph 1.2: Provenance of Victors, 6th c. B.C. 100%

Unknown

90%

W. Asia Minor

80% 70%

Italy

60%

Sicily

50%

Balkans

40%

Aegean islands

30%

N. Greece

20%

Central Greece

10%

Peloponnese

18

Pythian Games (all events)

Olympic Games (all events)

Olympic stadion victories

0%

Chapter I Tables 1.1 and 1.2 compare the provenances of victors in the Pythian Games in the 6th c. B.C. with those of victors in the other three Panhellenic games. The extreme paucity of information regarding the Isthmian and Nemean Games, and the consequent smallness of their samples, render these data useless; but the Pythian Games can be usefully compared with the Olympic Games. The first bar graph is calibrated

islands (69% at Olympia, 88% at Delphi), whereas the rest came from Greek cities in Asia Minor, or colonies in Magna Graecia and the Balkans.95 The data from Delphi follow roughly the same pattern as those from Olympia, though the proportion of victors, and hence of contestants, coming from Italy is noticeably lower, which would seem to indicate that whereas both festivals drew upon the same pool of participants

Experimental Deviation in Data Samples 100

10

Chi-Square Value

1

0.1

0.01

2 Classes of Data 0.001

0.0001 99%

95%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

5%

1%

Chance of Randomness

according to the actual numbers of attested victors at each festival in the 6th c. B.C. and thus gives an indication of each sample's relative size and reliability. Graph 1.2 equalizes the bar heights for both the Olympic and Pythian Games to allow easy crosscomparison of their constituent proportions. The data of Graph 1.2 suggest that in the 6th c. B.C. the Pythian Games appealed to a somewhat different range of participants from the Olympic Games and filled a different niche. This of course begs the question of the Olympic Games' own function at this period, but the data do suggest certain conclusions.

throughout all of Greece, the games at Delphi attracted fewer competitors from overseas. Application of the c2 test does indeed indicate that the variations between Olympia and Delphi in numbers of Italian victors are unlikely to be accidents of survival and probably do reflect actual differences between the geographic draw of the two festivals in the 6th c. B.C.96. One also

At both Olympia and Delphi, the majority of the 6th c. B.C. victors came from either the Peloponnese,92 central Greece,93 northern Greece,94 or the Aegean

96

Euboia, Boiotia, Lokris, Phokis, Aetolia, Akarnania, and Kephallonia. 94

Northern Greece is defined as Thessaly, Epiros, and Kerkyra.

95

The Balkans include Thrace, Macedon, and Illyria.

For determination of the c2 value and its use in statistical analysis of archaeological data, see Joukowsky (1980), 295–296. The c2 test is a statistical means of determining the probability that a variation between observed data and the data one expects random and not statiscally significant. This is accomplished by comparing observed data (Ob) with expected data (Ex) according to the following formula:

92

c2 = S (Ob – Ex)2 Ex

Peloponnese includes everything within the Isthmus, as well as the island of Zakynthos. 93

Central Greece is defined as those territories lying outside the Isthmus, in a band from east to west: Megara, Attica, Aigina,

In the case of the Italian athletes, the expected data are those of Olympia, with which Delphi is being compared; and there are two

19

Chapter I

certain other geographic regions interest, and thus aptitude, in these same events would be much less.100

notices that a higher proportion of the victors at Delphi came from central Greece, which would make sense; and the c2 test very strongly corroborates the statistical significance of this data.97 One should look at the same time at a potentially corollary phenomenon, namely the number of Peloponnesian victors attested at Olympia, as compared to what one would expect from the Delphic data. Although the deviations in this case are smaller, there is only a 30% probability that the variation in numbers of Peloponnesian victors represented by our data at Delphi and Olympia would occur randomly.98 In other words, the older, more established Olympic Games were, by the 6th c. B.C., somewhat less parochial in their draw than the Pythian Games at that same time. One thing that these statistics hide is that Olympia, unlike Delphi, drew no musical or thespian contestants in addition to the usual athletes and aristocratic stable-owners.

The Italian pre-eminence in the 6th c. B.C. stadion victories is almost entirely due to the success of Krotonian athletes, who claimed eight of the nine victories over the course of that century.101 Elsewhere in Magna Graecia, the Sicilian cities of Kamarina and Himera each won an Olympic stadion, in 528 and 516 B.C. respectively. But clearly this event was the particular preoccupation of Kroton. This commanding pre-eminence in the stadion race declined somewhat in the 5th c. B.C. with the rise of Sicilian athletes in this event. As one can see from Graph 1.2, athletes from the states of central Greece frequently did well in the Olympic Games: nine different victors won single or multiple Olympic victories in the 6th c. B.C. The relative proximity of this region to Olympia is good reason for a large proportion of contestants to come from there; but were there certain events in which they were preeminent, if not in the stadion race? Out of a total of fifteen victories, six were victories by aristocrats, mainly Athenians, at the four-horse chariot race ( t e v q r i p p o n ), three were in all-in wrestling (pagkravtion), two at boxing (pugmh/v or puvx), one at the boys' stadion, and three at the eponymous men's stadion. Although chariot-racing seems to have been a particular enthusiasm of the Athenian upper classes, the competitors from the states of central Greece seem to have been fairly adept at a wide range of activities.102

A fifth column in Graph 1.1 represents the eponymous victors (stadionivkai) of the Olympic one-stade (stavdion) race and acts as a control, since the chronographers have furnished a complete list of names and provenances for these 25 men, who account for almost half of the 55 attested Olympic victors of the 6th c. B.C. The catalogue of stadionikai is roughly indicative of all the Olympic victor data, with two obvious differences. It is immediately clear that athletes from Italy won the s t a d i o n race very frequently, a disproportionate number of times by comparison with athletes from, say, central Greece. But what the chart does not show is that the stadionvictors almost solely constitute the Olympic victors from that region in the 6th c. B.C.99 Specialization and widespread training in certain events by certain geographic regions may have been a cultural dictate that resulted in more and better contestants in these events being sent to Olympia. The corollary is that in

The Athenian tethrippon victors include some of the greatest notables of Athenian society in the 6th c. B.C.: Alkmaion (592 B.C.), Miltiades son of Kypselos (560 B.C.), Kimon son of Stesagoras (536 and 528 B.C.), and Peisistratos (532 B.C.).103 These were surely occasions for grand gestures and ostentation by the elite of Greece (who left the actual job of driving to a professional charioteer). The value of the equestrian events of the Olympic Games as means of aristocratic is clear from the literary sources.104

classes of data, athletes from Italy, and athletes from everywhere else. The expected number of these contestants at 6th c. B.C. Delphi from Italy (Ex1) would be at Olympia's proportion of 18.2% (10 out of 55), or 3 Italians; but the actual number (Ob1) is only 1. And the number of contestants expected at Delphi from anywhere else (Ex2) would be at Olympia's proportion of 81.8% (45 out of 55), or 14 non-Italians; but the actual number (Ob2) is 16. The equation is solved thus: c2 = (1 – 3)2 + (16 – 14)2 = (-2)2 + (2)2 = 1.6 3 14 3 14

100 For instance, Homer's Phaiakians initially boast to Odysseus that their nation is pre-eminent in boxing, wrestling, jumping, and running but later confess that they are in fact deficient in the heavier events of boxing and wrestling, but still surpass all other nations in the lighter event of running, not to mention the more sophisticated skills of dancing and music (Odyssey 8.97–253). In his training manual for athletes, Philostratos (ca A.D. 230) considered the stadion to be the least strenuous contest (On gymnastics 33).

It can be seen from the accompanying chart that this value of c2 which falls within the range of random deviations only about 23% of the time. 97

If one uses Olympia's proportions as the point of comparison for the presence of central Greek athletes at Delphi, the following values result: Ob1 =7, Ex1 =3, Ob2 =10, Ex2 =14. These yield c2 =6.5, which falls within the range of random deviations only about 1% of the time.

101

A ninth stadion victory was won in 520 B.C. by Anochos of Taras, who also carried off the crown for the two-stade race (divaulo") at the same games (Moretti [1957], 74, #130–131).

98 The values Ob1 =19, Ex1 =23, Ob2 =36, and Ex2 =32 yield c2 =1.2, which falls within the range of random deviations about 30% of the time.

102 Kyle ([1987], 102–124 and 195–228) lists all the known and possible Athenian athletes of this period. 103 Kimon actually ceded his victory in the Olympic Games of 532 B.C. to Peisistratos (Herodotos 6.103; Moretti [1957], 72, #120).

99

Milon of Kroton was the only one of 10 Olympic victors from Italy that century who was not a runner. A similar situation existed for Thessaly in northern Greece: all of its attested Olympic victors in the 6th c. B.C. were runners, mostly in the one-stade race.

104 The most notable instance of such a thing in an Athenian context is Alkibiades's boast that he entered in the Olympic tethrippon race

20

Chapter I Delphi continued in the 6th c. B.C. to be a place with which it was important for foreign notables to maintain contact, as it had been for two centuries already. It was more than just a clearing-house for international trade and a meeting place for far-flung nobles. Jean Pouilloux, for instance, has traced the pattern of Cypriot contacts with the sanctuary for a period of almost a thousand years, starting in the late 8th c. B.C., which obviously demonstrates how important a claim to Hellenism was for the remote elites of Cyprus.105 By the Hellenistic period, at least eight different cities in Cyprus (Salamis, Karpaseia, Chytroi, Keryneia, Lapethos, Soloi, [Tam]assos, [Thr]o[n]oi and probably Arsinoe-Marion) were formally invited to the Pythian Games by the thearodochoi from Delphi. And in the 7th c. B.C., even before the games' foundation, the tyrant Kypselos built one of the very earliest structures at the sanctuary, a treasury later renamed that of the Corinthians.106 The 6th c. B.C. saw the acme of rich votive offerings sent to Delphi by distinguished foreigners, especially outside of Greece, which suggests aspirations to the attainment of Hellenic culture and recognition in the circles of Greek nobility.

Table 1.1: Accretion of Events to the Olympic and Pythian Games107

aulode

—

591/0 (dropped immediately)

salpinktes

396

?

keryx

396

?

stadion

776

591/0

boys' stadion

632

591/0

diaulos

724

591/0

boys' diaulos

—

591/0

dolichos

720

591/0

boys' dolichos

—

591/0

hoplites

520

498

pentathlon

708

591/0

boys' pentathlon

628 (dropped immediately)

591/0

pale

708

591/0

Event

Olympia108

Delphi109

boys' pale

632

—

kitharode

—

591/0110

pyx

688

591/0

kithara

—

558

boys' pyx

616

591/0

aulos

—

591/0

pankration

648

591/0

boys' pankration

200

346

tethrippon

680

582

tethrippon for poloi

384

378

keles

648

591/0

keles for poloi

256

314

synoris

408

398

synoris for poloi

264

338

apene

500 (dropped in 444 B.C.)

—

kalpe

496 (dropped in 444 B.C.)

—

an unprecedented seven chariots, three of which finished in first, second, and fourth place (Thucydides 6.16.2; see page 24 below). Several of Pindar's Olympian odes celebrate horse or chariot victories, all of them by Sicilian aristocrats: 1, for Hieron of Syracuse; 2 and 3, for Theron of Akragas; 4 and 5, for Psaumis of Kamarina; and 6, for Hagesias of Syracuse (see Sandys [1978] for the following background information). Hieron was at the time of his victory (476 B.C.) the tyrant of Syracuse and kin by marriage to Theron, one of two tyrants of Akragas. Psaumis was one of the principal refounders of Kamarina in 461 B.C. after its destruction by Gelon a generation earlier; the victories celebrated by Pindar occurred in 452 and perhaps 448 B.C. respectively. Hagesias was a noble of Syracuse, putative descendant of Apollo, and rival of Hieron at the time that he won this Olympic crown in 476 or 472 B.C. 105

Pouilloux (1976b), 158–160, 164.

106

Bommelaer (1991), 153–155, #308.

107 Adapted from Miller (1991), 203. Bold-face dates denote the first occurrence of each event; and shaded rows indicate the men's events. 108

Philostratos, On gymnastics 12–13.

109

Pausanias 10.7.2–8.

110

Miller (1991) follows the testimony of Pausanias and consequently assigns with him to 586 B.C. the events of Eurylochos's chrematitic festival of 591/0 that celebrated the fall of Kirrha.

21

Chapter I Accretion of events at Delphi and Olympia

Professional athletics in the 6th c. B.C.

Pausanias's account of the quick growth of the Pythian Games from their inception in the 580s B.C. is a welcome supplement to a similar account that survives of the accretion of events in the Olympic Games in the chronicle of Sex. Iulius Africanus.111 When the canonical first Olympic Games were held in 776 B.C., there was only one event, the stadion race; and this remained the state of affairs for over fifty years, until the two-stade d i a u l o s race was added to the programme in 724 B.C. Thereafter, more events, both athletic and equestrian, were added to the programme at regular intervals over the next hundred years or so, until 616 B.C., when all innovations to the Olympic programme ceased for another century. In the meantime, the Pythian Games had of course commenced and included from their inception a full slate of competitions closely resembling those that had been incorporated up to that time in the Olympic Games. Each of these two great festivals featured certain events that the other did not; and the addition of the same new events to both festivals in the Classical and Hellenistic periods was not always initiated by Olympia, though the incorporation of new events roughly pari passu. at both festivals suggests new vogues in certain competitions. In other words, both festivals were quite independent of one another: each had its own distinctive character, and may not be cast into the same, homogeneous mould that their common designation as Panhellenic Games might suggest. Table 1.1 above shows that the programme of events at the Pythian Games was largely determined early in its existence and was little supplemented later. A similar conservatism is also evident from the fact that although Delphi was the premier venue for musical competition, no contest for rhapsodes was introduced there once the rhapsodes had become a popular fixture of 6th c. B.C. culture.112 On the other hand, the Pythian programme likely influenced the ancient Panathenaia festival of Athens when the latter underwent the addition of contests, including musical events, in 566/5 B.C. But Delphi's taste in such matters was in no way generally binding: for instance, although the aulodic contest had been immediately dropped from the programme at Delphi after just one appearance, it was included in Greater Panathenaia and apparently remained popular for centuries.113

Who were the early Pythian victors, and whence did they come? Was there any overlap with Olympic victors that might suggest that both festivals attracted the same range of contestants? Table 1.2 on the following pages shows that of the seventeen Pythian victors attested in the 6th c. B.C., the great majority (15) came from the Greek homeland, but only two from overseas. These were the noted wrestlers Milon of Kroton (fl. 540–512 B.C.) and Tisandros of Sicilian Naxos (fl. 572–560? B.C.).114 Since these two men constitute a category unto themselves, they will be considered first.

114 The dates of Milon of Kroton are well known, but those of Tisandros are much less secure. Concerning his floruit, Moretti ([1957], 69) opines:

111

The comment of Philostratos in his On gymnastics (2) that he will describe the history of each athletic event by reference to Elean records (ta; ∆Hleivwn) because they were the most precise (ajkribestavtwn), indicates that even in antiquity the histories of festivals such as the Pythian Games were not well-known (cf. Jüthner [1909], 109–116 for explication of ta; ∆Hleivwn). 112

Shapiro (1992), 72–74. Burkert (1987), 48–51.

113

Pausanias 10.7.5. Shapiro (1992), 61, 64.

E poiché anche dal fr. [23B: "...ajmeuvsasqai Navxion Tivsandron,"] di Pindaro sembra potersi dedurre una certa antichità di T., fermo restando che i limiti cronologici estremi sono il 573 (istituzione delle Nemee) e il 500 (dopo questa data conosciamo il nome degli olimpionici nel pugilato), propenderei a collocare le vittorie di T. nel secondo quarto del VI secolo.

22

Chapter I

Table 1.2: Pythian victors of the 6th c. B.C. Name

Date

Ethnic

Event

Authority

Melampous

591/0

Kephallonia, central Greece

kitharodia

Pausanias 10.7.4. Krause (1841), 94.

Echembrotos

591/0

Arkadia, Peloponnese

aulodia

Pausanias 10.7.4, 6. Krause (1841), 90.

Sakadas

591/0, 582, 578

Argos, Peloponnese

aulos

Pseudo-Plutarch, De musica 1134A–B, 1135C. Pausanias 2.22.8–9, 4.27.7, 6.14.9–10, 9.30.2, 10.7.4–5. Pollux 4.79, 4.84 (cf. Strabo 9.3.10 [421]). Hesychios s.v. Sakavdeion. Athenaios 13.610c. Krause (1841), 99.

Kleisthenes

582

Sikyon, Peloponnese

tethrippon

Herodotos 6.126. Pausanias 10.7.7. Moretti (1957), 70. McGregor (1941), passim. Krause (1841), 95.

Pythokritos

574, 570, 566, 562, 558, 554

Sikyon, Peloponnese

aulos

Pausanias 6.14.10. Krause (1841), 99.

Tisandros

perhaps 570, 566, 560, 556

Naxos, Sicily

boys' and men's pale

Pausanias 6.13.8. Moretti (1957), 69–71, #94, 98, 101, 105. Klee (1918), 76, #1-4. Krause (1841), 103.

Kallias I

566

Athens, central unc. Greece equestrian: tethrippon?

Herodotos 6.122.1. Scholiast on Aristophanes, Birds 283. Kyle (1987), 203, A30. Moretti (1957), 70, #103.

Agelaos

558

Tegea, Peloponnese

kithara

Pausanias 10.7.7. Krause (1841), 86.

Agesilas

546

Lousoi, Peloponnese

keles

Pausanias 8.18.8. Krause (1841), 86.

Milon

538, 534, 530, 526, 522, 518, 514

Kroton, Italy

boys' and men's pale

Simonides fr. 153D (Diehl 216). Diodorus Siculus 12.9. Pausanias 6.14.5–8. Athenaios 10.412F. IOlympia 264? Moretti (1957), 72–76. Knab (1934), # 1. Klee (1918), # 5-7, 9-11, 14. Krause (1841), 96.

father of Pythonikos

ca 530?

Thebes, central Greece

running

Pindar, Pyth. 11.20–23, 67–69. Klee (1918), 77, # 8.

Alkibiades I

ca 525–500

Athens, central unc. Greece equestrian: tethrippon?

IG II2 6222. Kyle (1987), 195, A3. Daux (1922), 439, #1.

Glaukos

514, 510, 506?

Karystos, central Greece

men's pyx

Simonides fr. 23D. Pausanias 6.10.1–3. Demosthenes 18.319. Aischines 3.189. Dio Chrysostomus 78.20. Quintilian, Institutes 11.2.14. Lucian, Pro imag. 2.10, Herodotus 8. Aelius Aristides 50, 699C. Philostratos, On gymnastics 134.15, 168.23. Himerius 13.2, 43.5. Moretti (1957), 75–76. Knab (1934), 18–19, #2. Klee (1918), 77, #12, 15. Krause (1841), 92.

Timasitheos

518, 514, 510

Delphi, central Greece

men's pankration

Moretti (1957), 76–77; Klee (1918), 77, #13, 16, 17; Krause (1841), 103: Herodotos 5.72; Pausanias 6.8.6.

Thessalos

506?

Corinth, Peloponnese

men's stadion Pindar, Olympian 13.35–40 and scholiast thereto. Moretti (1957), 79. and diaulos Klee (1918), 77, #18. Krause (1841), 102.

23

Chapter I Phrikias

506?

Pelinaion, north Greece

men's dolichon?

Aichmeas

before 480 B.C.

Phokis, central boys' pyx Greece

Pindar, Pythian 10.20–27. Moretti (1957), 78–79. Klee (1918), 77–78, #20. Krause (1841), 98. Pausanias 10.33.8. Krause (1841), 85.

One needed more than just natural aptitude to make a living at athletics or musical contests, since at least some modest means was necessary for one to invest in a trainer, devote oneself entirely to the chosen metier for a while, and have the financial reserves to weather out a disappointing season or two. The costs of starting an athletic career would seem to have precluded from competition any individual with less than a comfortable surplus, but this was apparently not the case, even in the early days before state subsidies for promising athletes are first attested (ca 300 B.C.).120

Besides being colonists returned to the ancestral homeland, Milon and Tisandros were the most characteristic members of an obviously professional class of contestant at the Pythian Games.115 What is meant by professionalism is that these men entered contests such as the Pythian and Olympic Games on a regular and extended basis, at first for the sake of emolument, and later for the maintenance of their growing reputation for arete as well.116 Such men were not generally born into a social or economic elite, which would have rendered regular agonistic participation economically unnecessary, though the social stratum whence many an athlete came is admittedly unknown. But one general rule may be applied: the competitors in the equestrian events were at all periods drawn almost exclusively from the wealthy who would have overlapped with the social aristocrats to a large extent.117 The great men crowned for chariot- and horse-racing victories had seldom won the race themselves; this was a job for mere jockeys and charioteers, whether hired for the occasion or retainers in the great man's household. Thus, there was no question of professionalism in such instances, since the plutocrat or aristocrat in question had entered his race horses or chariot teams for the sake of personal kudos, or even for political ends, but not because he either needed to make money or wanted to make a living thereby.118 Indeed, it was precisely because he wanted to mingle only with the best and wealthiest men in Hellas, and to beat them, that Alkibiades entered multiple chariots in the tethrippon race at the Olympics of 416 B.C. rather than one of the athletic events.119

In a few cases, we know of Olympic victors who were born into humble families and held menial jobs before entering upon professional athletics.121 Each boy had a natural aptitude for speed or strength, which he was able to put to good use by winning prize contests in the boys' category. At a young age, natural ability, not years of training and coaching, would have won contests and given such boys the wherewithal to hire a coach, train seriously, and travel abroad to other contests.122 A number of the great athletes of the Archaic and Classical periods are known to have started their careers from boyhood, and probably in

ª∆Alkibiavdh"º oujdeno;" ajfuevstero" oujdæ ajrrwstovtero~ tw'/ swvmati genovmeno~ tou;~ me;n gumnikou;~ ajgw'na~ uJ p erei' d en, eij d w; ~ ej n iv o u~ tw' n aj q lhtw' n kai; kakw' ~ gegonovta~ kai; mikra;~ povlei~ oijkou'nta~ kai; tapeinw'~ pepaideu-mevnou~, iJppotrofei'n dæ ejpiceirhvsa~, o} tw'n eujdaimonestavtwn e[rgon e[sti, ... 120

Polymnestor of Miletos was a onetime goatherd and victor in the boys' stadion of 596 B.C. (Moretti [1957], 67, #79; Philostratos, On gymnastics 13). Glaukos of Karystos is said to have been a ploughboy before embarking upon athletics and winning the boxing contest at Olympia in 520 B.C. and Pythian crowns in 514, 510, and perhaps 506 B.C. (Moretti [1957], 75–76, #134).

115 The categorization of these men as professionals is to be further refined by recalling that no distinction was ever made for amateurs in ancient Greece. There did not even exist words for our concept of amateurs and amateurism (Young [1984], 7 n.1). 116

Miller (1991), 201.

117

Young (1984), 101–102; 102 n.102:

122

For instance, the prizes for first and second place in the boys' categories for various athletic events that are listed on the early 4th c. B.C. Panathenaic prize list IG II2 2311 are of significant value when calculated in terms of the contemporary cost of living (Young [1984], 119–121). The boy victor of the stadion race, for example, received 50 amphorae of oil (which Young calculates as having had a value of 600 drachmai, or equivalent to 1.41 years' full employment for a skilled tradesman of that time). But even the second-place boy received 10 amphorae of oil (thus 120 drachmai, or 0.28 years' wages). The Panathenaic Games were admittedly among the most prominent, thus eagerly-contested, of the second rank of agonistic festivals of Classical Greece; but a budding athlete with ability also had dozens of smaller, local festivals to choose from (see Klee [1918], 20–42 and 58–70 for a partial listing of the more minor festivals in Greece). One can draw a modern analogy with B.A. students seeking financial support for prospective graduate studies: they generally find that their success in obtaining a fellowship is commensurate with their natural ability to succeed (i.e. marks and recommendations); thus, those who find that they would be obliged to borrow money to go to graduate school often reconsider their goals.

It is worth noting that on at least two occasions (480 and 472 B.C.), the people of ‘horse-raising Argos’ (Iliad 3.75) apparently pooled their resources (or taxed themselves) to break the chariot-racing monopoly of the wealthy kings and nobles at Olympia with a ‘people's entry’ (Pap. Oxy. 222). The exclusiveness of competitive horse- or chariot-racing is understandable if one considers that a single horse of that quality cost 1,000 drachmai and up in the Classical period (Young [1984], 111 n.6; Anderson [1961], 136). The amount of financial embarrassment that belonging to the horsey set could incur, even for a prosperous household, is the vehicle that drives the plot of Aristophanes's Clouds. 118

Kyle (1982), passim.

119

Young (1984), 100–102, 157. Isokrates 16.33–34:

Young (1984), 109. Pleket (1975), 72.

121

24

Chapter I just this way.123 But this is not to say that all contestants in the non-equestrian events were professional athletes: whereas nobles may never have been among the majority athletes at the Panhellenic Games, a few are attested as victors in track and field events over the course of several centuries.124

votive offering to Athena to which this plaque was attached was evidently a tithe of his prize's worth:128

5

Literary sources, patchy though they may be, also attest prizes in cash or objects of intrinsic value in athletic contests of the 6th c. B.C., as well as earlier on.125 The notion that Greek athletic competions were originally only for amateurs has been exposed as the retrojection of a late 19th century ideal.126 The prizes in the top-rank, stephanitic games were no more than tokens, but they frequently brought with them tangible remunerations for the victor upon his return home. Plutarch, in his biography of Solon mentions specific cash prizes instituted by the lawgiver for citizen victors, to the amount of 100 drachmai for Isthmian victors, but 500 drachmai for Olympic victors.127 A bronze plaque discovered in Sybaris alludes to a substantial prize of material value that one Kleom(b)rotos, son of Dexilaos, won in connection with an Olympic victory of ca 600 B.C.; the uncertain

Do. Kleovmroto" oJ DexilavÛo ajnevqe–kæ ∆Olunpivai nikavsa" Ûivso(m) ma'kov" te pavco" te tæ ∆Aqavnai ajÛevqlo–n eujxavmeno" dekavtan.

5th c. B.C. sources attest other, non-cash remunerations for Panhellenic victors from Athens129 and Akragas.130 It is little wonder that some objected to the monies and perquisites lavished upon athletes, whose efforts, they complained, contributed nothing to the well-being or security of their state and who were too preoccupied with the idiosyncrasies of training ever to do their civic duty. The 6th c. B.C. poet Xenophanes was only the first of whom we know to level this charge against the athletic profession.131 Nor were athletes the only ones to profit, for praisesingers such as Pindar and Bacchylides received large fees from clients and the occasional lavish gift from contented cities.132 For victors to be able to afford

123

Young (1984), 158–160. The training of a potential boy-athlete as a financial investment, as well as the investor's concern for his future promise, are graphically illustrated by a papyrus letter discovered in the Fayum district of Egypt (PZenon 59060, 257 B.C., translated in Miller [1991], 166).

128

Moretti (1987), 81–83. SEG 35 (1985), 1053; SEG 29 (1979), 1017; SEG 27 (1977), 702. Ebert (1972), 251–255. Miller ([1991], 181) aptly asks, "What is a tenth of a crown of olive leaves?" Compare this with the early 6th c. B.C. dedicatory inscription of Echembrotos at Thebes (Pausanias 10.7.6 —see page 40 below)

124

Among the Homeric epics, Iliad 23 is most often cited as an example of kings and nobles at play for valuable prizes; but another, relatively ignored, passage (Iliad 22.159–166) is likely a better testimonium for aristocratic, and non-aristocratic, competition at the funeral games of Homer's own day (Young [1984], 112): the prize for the foot race is an ox-hide or sacrificial victim, whereas the more exclusive horse race is run for the higher stake of a slavewoman or a tripod. It is of course in the equestrian events that recognizable members of the elite are most frequently attested throughout antiquity, as is the case with the tethrippon victories of the future emperor Tiberius and his adopted son Germanicus Caesar in 4 B.C. and A.D. 17 respectively (Moretti [1957], 154–155, #738, 750: IOlympia 218, 221 [=SIG3 782, 792]). However, athletic victories are occasionally recorded as well. The last certainly dated Olympic victor, Varazdat, was prince of Armenia when he won the boxing event in A.D. 369 (Moretti [1957], 175, #944); and the exploits of Nero at Olympia and the other Panhellenic Games are famous —or infamous— enough to require no further details (Moretti [1957], 158, #790–795). 125

129

Miller (1991), 181–182. IG I2 77.11–17: a decree of the demos that legislates the right of an Athenian victorious at Olympia, Delphi, Isthmia, or Nemea to dine at public expense in the Prytaneion every day for the rest of his life. This right is repeated in two different clauses, once for those who have been victorious in the athletic competitions, and a second time for those who have won the keles race and the tethrippon, the only two equestrian events on the Olympic and Pythian programmes at that time (ca 440–432 B.C.). Why the same provision was reiterated according to class is uncertain. 130

Miller (1991), 182. Diodorus Siculus 13.82.7: the splendid parade that the city of Akragas organized in honour of Exainetos, the stadion victor in the Olympic Games of 412 B.C. 131

Young (1984), 46. Xenophanes fr. 2 (West and Diehl). Euripides fr. 282 (Nauck) should not be taken out of context and supposed to be the playwright's propria vox: Euripides elsewhere expresses quite the opposite sentiment (Hippolytos 1016: ejgw' dæ ajgw'na" me;n kratei'n ÔEllhnikou;" ⁄ prw'to" qevloimæ a[n, ejn povlei de; deuvtero"; fr. 755 [Page PMG]). Plato's Sokrates complains that Athenian Panhellenic victors hardly need avail themselves of the right to free meals in the Prytaneion that the state has granted to them (Apologia 36e) —presumably because they were now wealthy enough to live well without this subsidy (Young [1984], 131). In the Roman period, Galen and Philostratos resume the same complaint of wasted energy and lost service to the state.

See above, note 87.

126

Young (1984), passim.. The first scholar to dismiss this fantasy in print was Henri W. Pleket ([1975], 59; cf. idem [1974], passim): Archaic nobles are not known to have rejected remuneration for athletic successes either in theory or in practice.... Participation at Olympia did not prevent them from participation in games with ‘value prizes’ ...and from ca 600 B.C. onwards cities are known to have awarded money or bullion to their victorious athletes.

132

Pindar himself refers to the money made by rhapsodes in his own day (Isthmia 1.1–18):

But Pleket could not free himself from the spurious notion that participation in the Olympic Games was an elite perquisite (Young [1984], 89–103).

OiJ me;n pavlai, wj' Qrasuvboule, ⁄ fw'te", oi} crusampuvknwn ⁄ ej~ divfron Moisa'n e[bai⁄non kluta'/ fovrmiggi sunantovmenoi, ⁄ rJivmfa paideivou~ ejtovxeuon meligavrua~ u{mnou~, ⁄ o{sti~ ejw'n kalo;~ ei\cen ∆Afrodivta~ ⁄ eujqrovnou mnavsteiran aJdivstan ojpwvran. ⁄ aJ Moi'sa ga;r ouj filokerdhv~ ⁄ pw tovtæ h\n oujdæ ejrgavti~: ⁄ oujdæ ejpevrnanto glukei'⁄ai melifqovggou poti; Terwicovra~ ⁄ ajrgurwqei'sai provswpa malqakovfwnoi ajoidaiv. ⁄ nu'n dæ ejfivhti ãto;Ã twjrgeivou fulavxai ⁄ rJh'mæ ajlaqeiva~ ã + - Ã a[gcista bai'non,

127

Plutarch, Solon 23.3, 91B. Miller ([1991], 182), in his commentary on this passage, concedes that whereas the accuracy of Plutarch's account of Solon is uncertain, "...It shows that by the time of Plutarch his readers could easily imagine that money had been a part of athletics already at their inception."

25

Chapter I

victories at games that took place only once every two, or four, years are more the mark of a professional athlete who trained and stayed in top form for as many years as possible, rather than of a dilettante. However, the epigraphic evidence of the surviving catalogues casts some doubt on this hopeful premise. All surviving examples of such inscriptions that predate 480 B.C. come almost exclusively from Lakonia or the Argolid, the two great rivals in the Archaic Peloponnese. The most numerous fragments and complete inscriptions come from late 6th to early 5th c. B.C. Sparta, where local athletes were glorified to the extent that up-to-date lists of victors at the local games were publicly exhibited earlier here than anywhere else in Greece.137 Because the inscriptions of this period survive mostly in very fragmentary condition and, even when they are discovered more or less complete, were never in any case particularly garrulous, it is consequently impossible to demonstrate that professional athletics existed in Archaic Lakonia or the Argolid. In the case of Sparta, one suspects that the adoption in the late 6th c. B.C. of the constitution attributed to Lykourgos with its emphasis on physical excellence had something to do with Spartan interest in athletic competition. The first example from Sparta is the marble stele of Aiglatas the long-distance runner (dolicodrovmo", ca 500–480 B.C.):138

Pindar's fee, they must already have been rich (e.g. Hieron of Syracuse) or have become rich (e . g . Theagenes of Thasos).133 Athletic trainers and doctors were also in a lucrative position: the story of the physician Demokedes, who had made his fortune in Aigina, Athens, Samos, and at the court of king Dareios before escaping home to Kroton and marrying the daughter of Milon, shows the circles in which medical practitioners of renown might find themselves.134 There is no conclusive evidence to link Demokedes with sports medicine, but his marriage to the daughter of Milon and his settling down in Kroton whilst that city's policy of hiring champion athletes to compete in the Olympic Games was proving more successful than ever are suggestive.135 Advances in medical technology are thought to have been intimately interconnected with the practice of sports in the 6th c. B.C. and thereafter. In the case of professional coaches and trainers, we have literary evidence from the 6th c. B.C. and later to furnish a few details and complete the picture of a fully organized athletic machinery in operation by the late Archaic period.136 Archaic athletes' catalogues and their significance It was also in the 6th c. B.C. that athletes began to boast of their multiple victories at the games in inscribed catalogues. On the one hand, multiple

Aijglavta~ toi' Karneivoªi tºovdæ a[galmæ ajnevqe–ke penpavki nikavsa" to;ªnº mªakrºo;n kai; potevqªrexe tºo;n dovlicon tri5 avki", ∆Aqanaivoi" dª...8... ˙?ºai'per Surmaiva ª...º

⁄ Æcrhvmata crhvmatæ ajnhvrÆ ⁄ o}~ fa' kteavnwn qæ a{ma leifqei;~ kai; fivlwn. And Isokrates mentions that in return for a single line of flattery, Athens made Pindar a provxeno" and gave him 10,000 drachmai in cash (Antidosis 166).

The Athenaia and Syrmaia were both local contests held at Sparta.139

133

Miller (1991), 201. The social background of Theagenes is best gauged from Pausanias 6.11.2–9, where it is mentioned that his father was the priest of Thasian Herakles and had the means to pay for his son's education. What level of wealth this denotes is of course vague, but the prizes of some 1400 —or 1300 (SIG3 36)— victories in his twenty-two year career (Knab [1934], 21) surely increased whatever family means he might have inherited significantly if he was able to pay 12,000 drachmai in fines at the Olympic Games of 480 B.C., about midway into his career (Pausanias 6.6.6). The definitive treatment of Theagenes is that of Pouilloux (1954), 62–105. 134

Another Lakonian example from this early period comes from Geronthrai and is especially explicit about

137

Herodotos 3.129–133. Miller (1991), 177–179.

Jeffery (1990), 185; cf. 195: We may therefore suggest that [these fragments also] are lists of victors at the local games, and, in this connexion, note also a fragment of a similar but earlier list, found on the Akropolis at Sparta (44): here the names are listed in pairs, and the last pair are clearly written by a different hand from the rest. There is also one other very small fragment of a list in the Museum at Sparta (47), containing only the endings of three names: -eu" ⁄ -ofa" ⁄ -s≥ªo"º. If they are indeed victors' lists —which is, I think, at least as likely an identification as any other, especially in view of the elaborately recorded victors' dedications described above— it may perhaps have been from such stelai as these that Hellanikos (or his informants) drew part at least of the data for his Karneonikai.

135

Young (1984), 146 n.42. There is also the case of Ikkos of Taras, a Olympic victor in the pentathlon (444 B.C.) who, after he had retired from athletics, became a famous trainer and doctor of sports medicine (Moretti [1957], 103, #307: Pausanias 6.10.5, et al.). 136

Young (1984), 147–148. Coaches are not associated in the literary sources with any particular social stratum, though it is possible that they were often family members (see Chapter IV for the voicecoaches, phonakoi, of the Roman period). Since most athletes competed as professionals, it is entirely logical to assume that coaches were likewise professionals, since a few of them are known to have been retired athletes. The earliest attested trainers are Eryxias, who coached Arrhichion in about 564 B.C. (Moretti [1957], 70, #102: Philostratos, On gymnastics 21, Imagines 2.6), and Tisias the coach of Glaukos in about 520 B.C. (Moretti [1957], 75–76, #134: Philostratos, On gymnastics 20). In his victory odes, Pindar also praised athletes' trainers on occasion: Melesias (Olympian 8.54, Nemean 4.93, 6.68) and Menander (Nemean 5.48), both of whom were Athenians.

138 139

Moretti (1953), 19–21, #8; (=IG V.1.222).

The Athenaia were held in honour of Sparta's protectress, Athena Chalkioikos (Moretti [1953], 39). The Syrmaia are attested only by Hesychios (s.v. "Surmaiva"): ajgwvn ti" ejn Lakedaivmoni e[paqlon e[cwn surmaivan: ejsti; de; brwmavtion dia; stevato" kai; mevlito".

26

Chapter I the number and sequence of running victories, year by year:140

victorious, whilst a straightforward dedication (b) was cut into the column's shaft:144

ªdeuvtero" ... nikavs-º a" st≥avdioªn kai; divau-º lo(n), trivto" ˙ama' d≥i≥a≥u≥l≥ªonº, tevtarto" ta'i ˙ekatovmbai to;" pevnte do5 livco" trietevre" ejo;n nike'i: ta'i dæ a[llai stavdion kai; divaulon kai; dovlicon kai; to;" pevnte dolivco" kai; to;n ˙oplivtan nike'i ˙ama'.

(a) ª < + + < + + < + + < º Nemevai Tegevai te ªKl-º e–vtori Pellavnai ª + + < + + < + + stoi (Hermaic stevedores). SEG 36.154 was dedicated by the boule alone, 36.155 by both the boule and the demos of Miletos.

900 901

SEG 15.701; cf. IEphesos 4.1104.

Pausanias 6.10.4–5 recalls, for instance, how three men from successive generations of a family from Arkadian Heraia each won two Olympic victories in the late 6th and early 5th c. B.C.

136

Chapter IV

Ephesos.904 Moreover, these were only the best-known of dozens of agonistic festivals held each year in communities of all sizes throughout the eastern provinces.

suppression of both victories at minor festivals and losses anywhere.902 The precise relative position of several of the more recent foundations within the fouryear cycle is not known; and in other cases the inscriptions mention only a victory at a city such as Ephesos, without specifying which of the many games held there at regular intervals is intended. Despite these difficulties, it does emerge that a dedicated professional could easily have spent six months out of each year travelling from one major festival to another via a number of the more obscure ones. And certain festivals were surely scheduled with this consideration in mind. We learn from Statius that the Aktian Games at Nikopolis took place only a few weeks after the Sebasta Games at Neapolis/Naples and that there was a stream of contestants from one venue to the other once every four years.903 Some of the chronologically ordered inscriptions bear out this relative sequence by listing a victory at the Aktian Games immediately after one at the Sebasta Games. Evidence from literary and epigraphic sources further elaborates the schedule of events. The quadrennial Neapolis and Nikopolis festivals fell late in the summer season of the second year of each Olympiad; and immediately before coming to Neapolis to compete in the Sebasta Games, one could try one's luck at the quadrennial Capitoline Games in Rome and the Eusebia Games at Puteolanum. In that same season, athletes who toured mainly in Greece might go to the Nemean Games, the Heraia/Aspis at Argos, and the Eleuthera at Plataiai. There were also a number of well-attested games given in each year of the quadrennial cycle by the principal cities of western Asia Minor, Pergamon, Smyrna, and

There were enough opportunities that some athletes and performers could choose to focus on a particular geographic area. One such example is M. Aurelius [...]os, a runner of the early 3rd c. A.C.905 His career inscription, found in his hometown of Aphrodisias, alludes to work in Greece by calling him a Pythianvictor and Aktian-victor (Puqioªneivkºhn ∆Aktioneivkhn) among his other distinctions; but the actual catalogue of victories below this preamble makes it clear that his principal region of activity was Bithynia. Two generations previously, another Aphrodisian, M. Aelius Aurelius Menandros the pankratiast, had left a statue of himself and inscribed base to commemorate a career including a triumphant tour to cities in the remoter parts of Asia Minor, Syria, and the Levant. The cities and contests recorded in his itinerary were very much off the beaten track among athletes of the calibre to win victories at the first-rank contests of Greece and Italy; and Menandros may have considered it a lucrative proposition to put in appearances at a number of cities hungry for a taste of first-rate talent. The fact that no city's name is repeated in the catalogue suggests that Menandros only ever paid a single visit to each as he looped through the area. The record shows that he had begun winning contests, in the boys', youths', and men's categories at a number of major venues before embarking upon his extraordinary tour in apparent conclusion to his fighting career. One wonders if Menandros had somehow lost the edge he needed to remain competitive on the circuit of betterknown games. Advancing age or some mishap are obvious possibilities, but professional jealousies or an official censure are not impossible either.906 His grand

902

In a number of instances, the individual listing of several dozen more prominent victories is concluded by a simple total, frequently of three digits, of additional and more minor successes. These totals are particularly prevalent in the catalogues of non-athletes: the herald and actor C. Iulius Bassus, later 2nd c. A.C., concludes with an additional "...260 victories at other penteteric games," (Moretti [1953], #74); the Hadrianic trumpeter, Diogenes, son of Dionysios, cites a further "...80 victories at other sacred and stephanitic games," (IvO 232); the Antonine aulos-player, P. Aelius Aelianus concludes by mentioning 167 other victories at talantiaioi games (i.e. with a cash prize, FD III.1.547). On the other hand, the aulos-player, Tib. Scandilianus Zosimos, boasts of 287 cash prizes won at minor contests in the eparcheia of Crete (Strasser [2002], 99, 101; Daux [1944–45], 123–125, #36); the Augustan tragic actor, C. Iulius Iulianus claimed all of 340 victories at various penteteric and trieteric games (IG V.1.662, cf. ISmyrna 656); and the 2nd c. A.C. herald mentions a further 250 cash prizes won at unspecified other festivals (Moretti [1953], #70 =IvO 237). The catalogues of athletes seem to have been much more comprehensive, for one can only find a few instances of this phenomenon: there is the early 2nd c. A.C. M. Iustius Marcianus Rufus, a boxer from Sinope, whose list terminates with the mention of 150 other victories in talantiaioi and hemitalantiaioi games (Moretti [1953], #69); and there is a Domitianic pankratiast, T. Flavius Artemidoros, who concludes his list with the mention of victories in fourteen other penteteric games (Moretti [1953], #67 =IG XIV.746). 903

904

By the mid 2nd c. A.C., Pergamon hosted all the following games at least once per quadrennium: the Asklepeia Augusta, the Herakleia, the Commodeia, the Nikephoria, the Trajaneia, the Romaia Sebasta, and its own Olympics. Smyrna produced the following games: the Hadrianeia Olympia, the Romaia, and its own Olympics. And Ephesos likewise hosted the following games: the Hadrianeia, the Artemisia, the Balbilleia, the Epinikia, the Epheseia, the Romaia, and its own Olympics. These three cities also took turns among themselves to host the quadrennial games of the Koino;n ∆Asiva" (Moretti [1953], pages 154–155). 905

Moretti (1953), #80.

906

One thinks of another pankratiast, M. Aurelius Asklepiades, nicknamed Hermodoros, of Alexandria, who was forced into premature retirement by unspecified jealousies after a meteoric career of only six years (Moretti [1953], #79, lines 35–41 =IG XIV.1102): 35 ...ajqlhvsa" ta; pavnta e[th e{x, pausavmeno" th'" ajqlhvsew" ejtw'n w]n keæ dia; tou;" sunbavnta" moi kinduvnou" kai; fqovnou", kai; meta; to; pauvsasqai meta; pleivona crovnon ajnankasqei;" ejn th'/ patrivdi ∆Alexandreiva/ kai; 40 neikhvsa" ∆Olumpiva pankravtion ∆Olumpiavdi e{kth/.

Silvae 2.2.6–8 (Moretti [1953], 204–206): huc me post patrii laetum quinquennia lustri, cum stadio iam pigra quies canusque sederet pulvis, ad Ambracias conversa gymnade frondes.

137

Chapter IV

ta;" eJautou' qugatevra", ejcouvsa" kai; aªujtºa;" ta;" aujta;" poªleiteiva".º

tour began in northwest Anatolia with victories at contests in Mytilene, Adramyttion, Nikomedia, Nikaia, Prusa, and Claudiopolis. He then journeyed from Bithynia to Galatia, where he won further victories at Ankyra and Pessinos. The next entries in the catalogue resume the journey through Syria and and the Levant:907 Damaskos, Berytos, Tyros, Caesarea Straton, Neapolis in Samaria, Skythopolis, Gaza, and Caesarea Panias. The itinerary resumes on the return trip west with the mention of successes at HierapolisKastabala and Anazarbos in Cilicia, then Mopsouestia in Lykaonia, and finally Phrygian Kibyra, not far from Aphrodisias.

Column I Trufw'san neikhvsasan Puvqia ejpi; ajgwnoqetw'n ∆Antigovnou 5 kai; Kleomacivda, kai; “Isqmia ejpi; ajgwnoqevtou ∆Ioubentivou Provklou stavdion kata; to; eJxh'", prwvth parqevnwn. Column II ÔHdevan neikhvsasan “Isqmia ejpi; ajgwno10 qevtou Kornhlivou Pouvlcrou ejnovplion a{rmati, kai; Nevmea stavdion ejpi; ajgwnoqevtou ∆Antigovnou, kai; ejn Sikuw'ni ejpi; ajgwnoqevtou Menoivta: ejneivka de; kai; pai'da" kiqarw/dou;" ∆Aqhvnhsi Sebavsteia 15 ejpi; ajgwnoqevtou Nouivou tou Fileivno(u): prwvªth ajpæ aijw'ºno" ejgevneto polei'ªti" . . . . . . 12 . . . . . . ºrw parqevno".

Female athletes at the Pythian Games One may fairly claim a unique place for the final Pythian victor to be discussed in this chapter, Tryphosa of Tralleis, on account of her gender. She was in fact one of three sisters who toured a number of festivals in Greece with their father, Hermesianax, during the 40s A.C. The extraordinary text inscribed on a base at Delphi that records the successes of the three sisters and once supported their statues deserves quotation in full. Each sister merits a column of text below her statue. Tryphosa was the most distinguished of the three and could claim running victories at Delphi and Isthmia, "the first of maidens (to do so)". Hedea boasts of running victories at Isthmia, Nemea, and Sikyon, as well as a kitharodic win at the Sebasteia festival in Athens, "the first female of the century (to do so)." Dionysia, like her sister Tryphosa, specialized in the stadion-race, which she won at Epidauros and (apparently) at either Nemea or Delphi:908

Column III Dionusivan neikªhvsasan . . . ca 6 . . . º ejpi; ajgwnoqevtou ∆Anªtigºovªnouº, 20 kai; ∆Asklavpeia ejn ∆Epidaurw/ th'/ iJera/' ejpi; ajgwnªoºqevtou Neikotevlou stavdiªonº. ∆Apovllwni Puqivw/. There is no indication that the stadion races won by Tryphosa were in any way outside the regular Pythian Games. Rather it is a unique document that attests competition between male and female athletes in at least some events of Greece's oldest competitions. Indeed, her claim to be the prwvth parqevnwn to win the stadion event at Delphi and Isthmia can only have meaning if she competed against male athletes at those places. Women-only competition had occupied a small place in traditional Greek athletics, but it apparently moved closer to the centre stage in later centuries.909 One can cite a few instances to illustrate this phenomenon,910 but there is nothing to foreshadow the

Preamble ÔErmhsivanax Dionusivou Kaisareu;" Tralªlianºo;", oJ kai; Koªrivnqio",º

Luigi Moretti has worked out that his active career ended in A.D. 182 and that he won the Olympics at Alexandria in A.D. 196 at an age of thirty-eight or -nine ([1953], 231–232). The years of retirement were occupied in part by administration of a number of offices at Rome that Asklepiades had inherited from his pankratiast father, M. Aurelius Demetrios (lines 1–7; cf. Moretti [1953], 230 and IG XIV.1104). The offices granted by Antoninus Pius to Demetrios of ajrciereu;" tou' suvnpanto" xustou', dia; bivou xustavrcou, kai; ejpi; balaneivwn tou' Sebastou' were hereditary, on the condition that one's son also chose to pursue an athletic career (Moretti [1953], 235). While at Rome, Asklepiades enjoyed an additional distinction of his own, the presidency of the Temple Wardens of the Great Sarapis (lines 5–6, ...presbuvtato" tw'n new⁄kovrwn tou' megavlou Saravpido"...; cf. IG XIV.1103).

909 Pausanias's mention at 5.16.1 of a girls' race in honour of Hera at Elis is the best-known example; but other local festivals apparently had similar events also. A Greek humanist, Manuel Souliardos, annotated his copy of Pausanias (MS 1410) at this passage with a notice of an inscription that he had seen near his home town of Patrassos (Moretti [1953], 168): Nikhgovran Nikovfilo" nikhvsasan drovmw/, to;n tw'n parqevnwn drovmon, th'/dæ ajnevqhka livqou Parivou, th;n glukutavthn ajdelfhvn. 910

Moretti (1953), 167–169. The musical performances of Polygnota of Thebes at Delphi in 86 B.C. have been discussed in Chapters I and III. In Rome of the 1st c. A.C., one hears of a wrestling match between the Palfurius Sura and a Spartan maiden, on account of which Vespasian later dismissed the former from the Senate (scholiast on Juvenal 4.53; cf. Suetonius, Domitian 13). The Capitoline Games instituted at Rome by Domitian in A.D. 86 included a race for girls only (Suetonius, Domitian 4; cf. Cassius Dio 61.19). At least one occurrence of the equally prominent Sebasta Games at 2nd c. A.C. included a race for the daughters of local magistrates (Moretti [1953], 169). By the time of Commodus, the

907

With exception of Damaskos, Berytos, and Tyros, very little is known about the games held in these cities (Moretti [1953], 209–210). Three additional victories at Tripolis in Phoenicia, Philadelphia in Arabia Petraea, and Zeugma in Commagene, added near the end of the list, seemingly out of place, likely belonged to this leg of the tour as well. 908 Moretti (1953), #63 (=FD III.1.534); cf. Fontenrose (1988), 135–136 and Engels (1990), 52. Hermesianax merited his own statue base (FD III.1.533, vide infra). Both bases were found next to one another and to the east of the Treasury of the Sikyonians.

138

Chapter IV mixed competition implied by this inscription. On the other hand, the only one of the periodos festivals known to have explicitly prohibited the participation of women, whether as athletes or spectators, was the Olympic Games. The testimony of Pausanias indicates that this was still the case in the late 2nd c. A.C., but the import of his remarks may have been to emphasize to his reader that venerable Olympia yet remained steadfastly traditional.911 This hardly means that female competition was rampant in the Roman world; and the text on the base of a Delphic monument to Hermesianax himself does give the impression that he had engineered a curious novelty by taking his daughters on tour:912

5

circuit frequently paralleled the tendencies of their audience. These ostensible objects of attention took pains to visit the most prestigious games, those of Greece's Panhellenic circuit, in the hope of making a very public demonstration of their success. Victories at Delphi or Olympia did not have financial incentives, at least not directly; and this must mean that such a thing must have secured for the victors something that money could not buy. This was what it had always been: not by itself to succeed, but to be seen to succeed.

ÔA povli" tw'n Delfw'n ÔErmhsiavnakta Dionusivou Tralliano;n Kaisareva kai; ta;ãiÃ" eJautou' qugatevra" ajreth'" e{neka kai; eujsebiva" th'" pro;" to;n qeovn.

If one is correct to suppose that the performance of Tryphosa and her sisters at Delphi and other agonistic festivals of Roman Greece did have an exhibitionist component, this chapter has come almost full-circle to the popular gestures of benefactors and others in the audience. Festivals such as the Pythian Games never focused solely on those competing on the stadium track or theatre stage. Some of the spectators, probably even the great majority of them, came to the Pythian Games to watch the competitions and take in the sights of historic Delphi; but there were others in the stands who wished to attract some share of the crowd's attention at such a significant venue. One can imagine that the province's social elite congregated at regular intervals determined by the Panhellenic Games and other major festivals of Greece to resume its community life in a brief flurry of activity. Games at Olympia, Delphi, Isthmia, Argos, Athens, Sparta, and elsewhere were different stops on an itinerary of social obligations. Plutarch's Quaestiones convivales, many of which are set at one festival or another, clearly reflect this episodic narrative of interactions. Although details are now all but vanished, the intrigues between rival groups of sophists or gentleman benefactors must often have been as competitive and keenly exciting as the contests enacted before them. But this is not to diminish the role of professional athletes and musicians, whose utilization of the festival Olympic Games at Antioch included a separate footrace, wrestling match, and contest in tragic acting for women (Malalas 10.378–379; cf. Libanios 10 for a supercilious exposition of what these games at Antioch were to become). 911

5.16.2–8. Pausanias harps on the subject elsewhere in his treatise of Olympia as if it were a curiosity (e.g. 5.6.8, the story of Pherenike, who trained her son; cf. 3.8.1–2, 5.12.5, and 6.1.6–7, the equestrian victories of Kyniska, daughter of the Spartan king Archidamos). 912

FD III.1.533.

139

Chapter V

Chapter V: Imperial Intervention at Delphi

were duly grateful, though it is inaccurate to suppose that they were more than usually obsequious, or that the emperors had anything less than genuine respect for the sanctuary.

Introduction This chapter will deal with the most notable episodes of imperial involvement at the Delphic sanctuary and the Pythian Games. The preceding chapters have already touched upon this theme since many aspects of Roman Delphi were inextricably connected with imperial interests or eventually subject to the control of the emperor. The emperors were able to direct the good use of funds at Delphi and remedy her failings without either compromising either their own dignity or her proud scruples by appointing officers such as the Amphiktyonic epimeletai and the diorqwvtai tw'n ej l euqev r wn dhv m wn kai; pov l ewn, such as Aemilius Iuncus, who executed their will with minimal obtrusion.913 The other side of the coin was the emperors' appreciation for the importance of Delphi as a Panhellenic site.914 Their concern for Delphi's welfare is best attested by texts inscribed into the south cella wall of the Apollo temple that range in date from Claudius to the 340s A.C. The latest text, though in the form of a letter sent from three Praetorian Prefects, not an emperor, still exhibits the same insistence on the undisturbed continuation of the sanctuary and its rites that one can see in examples from the 1st and 2nd c. A.C.915 In return for this protection, the Delphians

The incidence of imperial involvement with Delphi and its institutions was especially high in the late 1st and the 2nd c. A.C. Whereas earlier emperors such as Augustus, Claudius, and Nero did have limited and haphazard dealings with Delphi, it was not until the Flavian period that one can detect a consistency of imperial patronage there. For about a century after the reign of Titus, a number of emperors took a seemingly personal interest in the historic sanctuary's fortunes, even to the extent of assuming the town's eponymous archonship and using their considerable powers to safeguard Delphi's success. In many instances, however, the paucity of surviving evidence makes further elaboration on the specifics of this or that emperor's interest in Delphi impossible. It is really only in the case of Domitian that one can discern a pattern of causes and effects and thus offer plausible conjectures about the degree of personal contact between Delphi and the emperor. As a result, this chapter is largely devoted to describing a series of events in the 80s and 90s A.C. whereby Domitian and his administration brought about the sanctuary's celebrated efflorescence. The evidence for his interest in Delphi outstrips what might be due to mere accident of survival and, I believe, represents an actual turning point in the sanctuary's history that has invariably been attributed to Hadrian, a more conspicuous philhellene.

913 Pouilloux (1980b), 204–206. For Aemilius Iuncus, see page 171 below. 914 Caligula wrote in reply to an embassy from Boiotian Akraiphia that had pressed numerous honours upon him shortly after his accession that he would allow statues of himself to be erected only at Olympia, Nemea, Delphi, and Isthmia (IG VII.2711, lines 21–42).

What Hadrian did do was conscientiously administer Delphi's affairs, and thus remain in dialogue with the Delphians, over a period of several years in the 120s and early 130s A.C., during which time his desire to reinstate an imagined past led him to tinker with the Amphiktyony. For these things he deserves some discussion towards the end of the chapter. But his pronouncements on the Pythian Games, at least, followed a precedent of conservatism that Domitian had already set. On the other hand, the games were pressed into a new service by other emperors and sometimes became a stage for glorification of one's self or one's dynasty. Nero's performance at the Pythian Games of A.D. 67 was the most egregious example of this usage and even left its trace in the

915

Pouilloux (1980b), 205 and n.18 and idem (1976a), 178 describes the contents of Delphi Museum 1647+4077 as a rescript issued by three praetorian prefects in response to a petition from Flavius Felicianus, Apollo's priest at Delphi and an agnate of the family of Constantine (Athanassiadi [1989], 275–277). The letter confirms official protection from taraxia, by which the Christians are no doubt to be understood. Although the Greek text has yet to be published, Athanassiadi (1989), 276 has produced an English translation: Letters sealed by decree of the damiourgoi and engraved in the public archives. Flavius Domitius Leontius, Fabius Titianus, Furius Placidus to Count Flavius Felcianus, greetings. We find it unbecoming that you, who have deserved the priesthood of the Pythian Apollo, who have been raised to every single honour by our deified emperor, and have been applauded by our own masters and by the whole city of Delphi, should be disturbed by someone in the very exercise of the priesthood. Since we personally respect you, and so that you stay in peace in the future, we decree that, if from now on anybody should annoy you... we shall condemn him to be exiled from Delphi and pay a fine. We wish you health and prosperity.

...accomplish the rites, because of your ...on account of your acts ...since no... The three Praetorian Prefects are otherwise known to have been active in the 340s A.C.: Fabius Titianus was Praetorian Prefect of Gaul; Flavius Domitius Leontius was Praetorian Prefect of the East; and Furius Placidus was Praetorian Prefect of Italy. For the damiourgoi, see Chapter II, pages 52ff.

Fl. Dom. Leontius, Fa. Titianus, Fur Placidus to Count Fl. Felicianus, greetings. ...To be priest of Apollo and

140

Chapter V material record of the Delphi theatre where he performed. Although no other emperor ever competed in the Pythian Games, a more subtle form of selfpromotion was practised at this festival several decades later, when Antoninus Pius inserted special events into its schedule that would honour his deified, adoptive father, Hadrian, and thus, indirectly, himself.

work of art and as an artifact with an archaeological context suggests a manufacture at the time of, and in connection with, Nero’s visit to Delphi in A.D. 67. Table 5.1: Herakles frieze at Delphi Panel Number

Setting Marks

I (N.B.unknown to Perdrizet in 1896)

[A]

II

[A-B]

Cerberus; Nemean Lion; Centauromachy (part I)

5431

III

B–[G]

Centauromachy (part II); Hydra; Antaios

2556

IV

[G]–D

?; Amazonomachy; Geryon (part I)

4233+2081

V

D–[E]

Geryon (part II); horse of Diomedes; Diomedes

2455+1555

VI

E

916

The Herakles frieze

In the first room of the Delphi Museum is a frieze depicting the Labours of Herakles. There are ten duels from a probable nine Labours that cram the extant portions of the Delphi frieze.917 The sculptor tried to avoid rhythmic monotony by varying Herakles’s orientation and stance, but the effect is ruined by an overly compact and confusing disposition of figures.918 It has been the object of serious study only twice, by Pierre Lévêque in 1951, and by Mary Sturgeon in 1978. As regards the frieze's date, everyone agrees upon a terminus ante quem of the Hadrianic period, because the relief figures exhibit none of the drill-work in the hair or the eyes, for instance, that became characteristic at that time.919 Sturgeon and Lévêque both agree that the Delphi frieze is stylistically eclectic, though Sturgeon’s comparanda a r e Hellenistic, whereas Lévêque emphasizes the inspiration of Classical prototypes.920 Otherwise, the two scholars diverge utterly. Lévêque advances a date in the 1st c. A.C., but Sturgeon produces strong counter-arguments and settles on a date of ca 110–90 B.C.921 But closer consideration of the frieze as both a

916

Labours

Garden of the Hesperides; ?

?; Stymphalian Birds

Delphi Museum Inv. 5432+1798

2545

The fragments on display in the Delphi museum were found either atop the paving of the theatre orchestra or nearby. In the initial, 1897 publication, Paul Perdrizet reasonably concluded that the Herakles frieze had once adorned the front face of a now-missing stage, the position of which is still obvious from the cut-off paving of the orchestra; and consideration of the setting marks incised near the panels' edges argues strongly that this was indeed the frieze's original context.922 In and of themselves, setting marks on the front face of a relief need not indicate a reused context.923 Since the setting marks on the Delphi frieze are alphabetic, they clearly suggest a logical sequence of panels in the order of panel A-B, then B-G, then GD, etc. Anne Jacquemin has showed that if one were to arrange the frieze panels around the base of a

This section and the next essentially reproduce Weir (1999).

917

Jacquemin (1985), 587. Sturgeon (1978), 229 believes that there were twelve episodes in all. 918

The bristling horror vacui that results is perhaps the result of an unimaginative and unsuccessful adaption of a pattern seen elsewhere by the sculptor or his patron. Faute de mieux, Boardman (1990), 7, 9, 16, #1709 and 1712 suggests a Herakles group carved by Lysippos at Alyzia in Akarnania as the inspiration for this frieze. But since the group was transported to Rome before the Imperial period (Strabo 10.2.21, 459), this hypothesis is unlikely. 919

Lévêque (1951) 252 and 261. Sturgeon (1978), 234 is in tacit agreement, but she sees no reason why the reliefs could not be very much earlier than the 2nd century A.C. Bieber (1961), 304 n.93 had already assigned such a date to the Delphi reliefs by drawing comparisons with the relief along the front of the skene of the Theatre of Dionysos at Athens. 920

Sturgeon (1978), 231–232 concentrates on how the use of space in the Herakles frieze compares with that in the Aemilius Paullus monument at Delphi and various other reliefs of ca 150–100 B.C. from Asia Minor (cf. Süssenbach [1971], 79–86). But Sturgeon still concludes that the Herakles frieze is eclectic (235). On the other hand, Lévêque (1951), 254–263 searches for the stylistic and iconographic inspirations for a number of the episodes; whereas Classical motifs predominate (e.g. the Parthenon metopes show iconographically similar Centauromachies), a number of them made subsequent appearances in Hellenistic and Roman art.

of the protagonist in temporally separate scenes that are, however, crammed together), and the same lack of Raumdarstellung characteristic of the High Empire. Sturgeon (1978) points out that the precise appearance of the Roman stage building is not certain from the publications of the École Française thus far, not one of which has been devoted exclusively to the Delphi theatre, and tries to cast doubts upon the originally theatrical context of the reliefs; she then proceeds to demolish most of Lévêque’s arguments for a Roman date, by pointing out, for instance, that the Telephos Frieze also employs what he defines as “pseudo-continuous narrative” too.

921

Lévêque (1951) produces comparanda for the formal characteristics of figural arrangement, representation of narrative, and use of three-dimensional space. He notes, for instance, the metope-like compositions of discrete figural groups, the use of “pseudo-continuous narrative” (which he defines as the reappearance

922 923

Perdrizet (1897), 602.

See, for instance, the relief panels of the Zoilos monument at Aphrodisias (R. Smith [1993]).

141

Chapter V

show Diomedes.929 In addition, the Delphic representations of Herakles wrestling Antaios and battling a centaur are unusual and iconographically unparalleled in Hellenistic depictions of the hero.930 As for a terminus ante quem, there are only nine Labours represented on the Delphi frieze, not the canonical twelve one sees on numerous sarcophagi of the 2nd–3rd c. A.C. Nor are the Delphic Labours yet illustrated in the same, canonical sequence that one sees on the sarcophagi.931 One may thus bracket the Herakles frieze to the 1st, or early 2nd, c. A.C. on purely iconographic grounds.

rectangular monument, one would either have to sacrifice the alphabetic sequence or interrupt with a corner certain episodes that overlap two panels.924 It is thus more plausible that the Herakles frieze was always intended to adorn a single surface.925 The limited range of alphabetic setting marks from alpha to epsilon that occurs on the pieces recovered thus far makes it improbable that the frieze was composed of any more than six slabs.926 Since each of the six panels was some 1.65m long, one may suppose at total frieze length of about 9.9m.927 As regards the frieze's formal characteristics, it contains certain iconographic features more suggestive of a Roman Imperial date than a Hellenistic one. Although there are a few Roman parallels for Delphi's panel V representation of a beardless Herakles engaged in his Labour to capture the flesh-eating horses of Diomedes, there exists only one Hellenistic parallel for this.928 Moreover, there is but a single, unequivocal illustration of Diomedes himself, and not simply his horses, in pre-Roman Imperial depictions of this Labour, though subsequent renderings commonly do

924

Although the Delphi frieze is much damaged, it seems reasonable that its best-preserved heads would exhibit a coiffure in a fashion distinctive of the period in which the frieze was carved.932 The heads of the frieze owe much more of their iconography to the disseminated images of the young emperor Nero than to Classical prototypes.933 It is dubious that the

929 Boardman (1990), 69–71 numbers only two certain examples, one of them on the Amyklai Throne described by Pausanias (5.10.9), besides the one at Delphi, which, he considers to be Hellenistic: "Diomedes appears only in the advanced Hellenistic."

Jacquemin (1985), 585–587.

925

Since the Centauromachy overlaps from panel A-B to B-G, and since the Geryon Labour overlaps from panel G-D to D-E, it is of course necessary to place each panel in those two pairs next to its complementary partner. Once one has done this, it is then impossible to place each pair on each of the long sides of a rectangular monument base, to place the other two panels with self-contained episodes (A and E) on the two short sides, and still preserve the alphabetic sequence of the setting marks. If one places the frieze in its original context around a rectangular monument base, one must then be content to have either the Centauromachy or the Geryon Labour interrupted by a corner (cf. Jacquemin [1985], 587 for a diagram of all the possible combinations). The only feasible arrangement requires that the panels A and E be located, respectively, at the left and right ends of a linear frieze.

930

Lévêque (1951), 254–255. The list of Ricardo Olmos and Luis J. Balmaseda (1981), 801–804, #1–33 confirms Lévêque's pronouncement on Antaios, at least as regards the representation of both combatants' feet still on the ground. Indeed, this Antaios iconography appears almost solely on ceramic of the 6th and 5th centuries B.C. If the centaur is meant to be Nessos (though other possibilities include Dexamenos, Acheloös, or Eurytion), then Lévêque is also correct about the absence of Hellenistic examples, since most Greek representations occur on Attic ceramic of the Archaic or Classical period (de Velasco [1992], 839–845, #1–96). 931 In addition, the frieze's figures exhibit neither the same suggestion of space behind the relief plane nor the same complexity of composition that one sees upon these same sarcophagi. Perdrizet (1897), 603:

926 Lévêque (1950) 224–232 publishes two new fragments illustrating the Garden of the Hesperides episode (Delphi Museum 5432+1798).

Le bas-relief n’est ni d’un beau style, ni d’une exécution soignée; cependant rien n’oblige d’y voir un travail de l’époque impériale. Les formes très élancées des personnages, les qualités de quelques morceaux de nu, nerveux, précis, sans lourdeur, ni enflure, la simplicité du bas-relief, nettement silhouetté sur un fond uni, partagé en petits groupes peu compliqués, sans superposition des figures, ni multiplicité de plans, conformément à la manière antique: autant de traits auxquels on peut reconnaître une oeuvre provinciale du premier ou du second siècle av. J.C. Ces reliefs sont encore d’un art bien au dessus de l’art confus des sarcophages romains. Ajoutons qu’à une époque plus basse, le cycle classique des douze travaux se serait sans doute imposé au sculpteur.

927 After the initial discovery in 1895 (Perdrizet [1897]), portions of a sixth slab were discovered in 1949 (Lévêque [1950], 224). If we assume that each of the six slabs had a length of 1.65m, which is the length of the extant slabs III and V, the whole frieze would have run to 9.90m (Jacquemin [1985], 586). 928 A beardless Herakles is by no means unknown in Greek art (e.g. the young Herakles of Polykleitos, as illustrated by Museo Barracco #109, a Roman copy), but he is seldom thus represented whilst performing his Labours. On the other hand, Herakles frequently appears as a beardless young man on the Roman relief sarcophagi (e.g. an example in Florence's Boboli Gardens), but usually only for Labours I–VI, all the Peloponnesian ones, for he is suddenly very mature and bearded by the time of his later, more exotic Labours abroad. One of these later Labours, the conflict with Diomedes and his horses, canonically Labour VIII, is represented at Delphi by a beardless, young Herakles (panel V), perhaps even twice over. It is commonly assumed that the vignette of Herakles wielding a club and standing over a kneeling figure in long, Oriental garb at the right end of slab V is Herakles versus the fallen Diomedes since the preceding vignette of Herakles about to club a rearing horse is iconographically demonstrable as a representation of this Labour. If it were, it would be the only Labour on the frieze to merit more than a single allusion. On the other hand, the figure of Diomedes is not uncommon in representations of this Labour from the Roman period (see next note).

932 Although the artistic style of a Roman Imperial portrait (i.e. the precise way in which an emperor was represented) could vary wildly from place to place and from artisan to artisan, its iconography (i.e. what precise details were represented) remained remarkably consistent. For the diffusion of the imperial image to the provinces, see Stuart (1939). 933 What stylistically distinguishes the coiffure of the Herakles head on panel V from replicas of potential, Classical prototypes is its flatness and the way it fits his skull like a cap: the feathery hair of Polykeitos's Doryphoros, for instance, possesses more volume and lift than that of the Herakles. Almost all of the examples of Greek sculpture known to us today are of course replicas of the Roman period, but I believe that in these cases the sculptors were

142

Chapter V Herakles figures were meant as actual portraits of Nero, but a vaguer parallelism was surely intended. The similarities between hairstyles in any case merit consideration as a chronological indicator. The salient points of comparison are the demarcation of several rather short, comma-shaped locks by sets of parallel lines incised into the mass of the hair; a sideburn composed of three principal strands, with a tip that twitches towards the face somewhat; and, at the back of the head, the hair brushed forward from the nape of the neck. A sideburn of three strands is characteristic of all Nero's portraits, though it best matches the panel V Herakles in his Type I–III portraits (A.D. 50–59).934 Although the arrangement of the hair over the nape of the neck is largely missing from the panel V Herakles, some surviving traces and another head do show that it cannot have extended much below the level of his ear, which is more in keeping with Nero's Type I–III portraits than the luxuriant growth of his later images. But what most closely connects the Herakles head on panel V with the boy-emperor is the course of the hairline from the forehead to the sideburn, which it does in a straight line that eventually curves smoothly down the front of the ear. Within the sphere of JulioClaudian portraiture, no bust of any other JulioClaudian emperor is comparable in this respect.935 Although Nero sports a more elaborate coiffure in his Type IV and V portraits, the hairline remains very similar. In Julio–Claudian art, such a hairline is otherwise found only on boys or youths, but not men, whose hairline descends in a sinuous pattern from forehead to temple.936 In short, the coiffure of the

Delphi head compares favourably with coin portraits from Nero's early years. If art-historical comparisons fail to convince, there is also archaeological evidence to suggest that the Herakles frieze was carved and installed in the Delphi theatre as part of construction work that occurred sometime in the middle decades of the 1st century A.C.937 A series of sondage excavations in 1950 established a terminus post quem for a paving of the orchestra that was included in this rebuilding.938 One of the paving stones was a statue base bearing an inscription honouring one Theokles from Nikopolis; and the text names him as a past chairman of the Amphiktyony.939 Since three other inscriptions fix this magistracy of Theokles in the reign of Tiberius (A.D. 14–37), the orchestra paving was therefore laid at some later date.940 Although one might suppose that this statue base would not soon have been used as spolia since his son, another Theokles, was very prominent in 1st c. A.C. Delphi, the evidence of the marble columns shows that this was not in fact the case.941 The orchestra was paved at the same time, or perhaps shortly after, an either side of a very slight, central part; a similar row of locks is indicated above the first one. In Nero's Type II portraits of ca A.D. 55–59 (Hiesinger [1975], 118: Cagliari, Museo Nazionale 35533, pl. 21, figs. 33–34; Mantua, Palazzo Ducale, pl. 22, figs. 35–36; Rome, Terme Museum 616, pl. 23, figs. 37–38), the part is more pronounced, the bangs across the forehead are longer and more tousled, but a second row of bangs is not apparent. The Type III and IV portraits reintroduce the second row of locks, but now they all curve to his proper right, although the bangs upon his forehead still lie to the left.

consciously trying to be more faithful to the originals than to commit the anachronism of, say, a contemporary hairstyle.

937

The Delphi theatre has never been properly excavated nor published in any detail, besides its inclusion in the excellent 1:100 scale atlas of the temenos produced by the École Française (Hansen and Algreen-Ussing [1975]). Even its date has been a matter of some conjecture, although the latest scholarship plausibly suggests a date of ca 160 B.C. for the completion of its original construction (Bommelaer [1992], 297–298).

934

See Hiesinger (1975) for an illustrated categorization and chronology of Nero's portraits. The Herakles head at Delphi bears some similarity of coiffure to Nero's pre-accession Type I portraits in Detroit (Detroit Institute of Arts 69.218, pl. 21, fig. 31) and Parma (Archaeological Museum 826, pl. 20, fig. 29; better illustrated by Kleiner [1992], 137, fig. 110) and a somewhat later Type II portrait in the Louvre (1210, pl. 19, figs. 26–27).

938

The results are publicly available in Daux (1951),136–137. Whilst in Athens, I was kindly permitted to inspect the original reports filed by Roux and Dunant from Delphi in May and June of 1950 (a dossier known as Rapport Dph 3.51). The excavators discovered that the orchestra paving, a low parapet around it, and some drains under it were laid in the Roman Imperial period, likely early on. Another reconstruction of the later Roman period involved the disruption of the lowest four or five rows of the central cuneus to accommodate a dais or tribunal atop a small loggia.

935

Compare, for instance, a portrait head of Caligula in Copenhagen's Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek (637a, illustrated by Kleiner [1992], 129, fig. 104). Although the emperor was only in his twenties when this portrait was made, incipient baldness is suggested by the hairline at his temples. In addition, the crab-pincer arrangement of two prominent locks above his proper right eye is not reproduced in either Nero's earliest portraits or the Herakles head from Delphi.

939

936

For the rendition of boys' hair, compare, for instance, the pattern of the hairline of the youth carrying a Lar from the Ara Pietatis frieze (ca A.D. 43, illustrated by Cordischi [1985], pl. 35.1) with those of the men standing beside him. A boy (‘Lucius’) on a fragment toward the rear of the north frieze of the Ara Pacis (13–9 B.C., illustrated by Kleiner [1992], 95, fig. 77) has a similarly straight hairline, as do a number of the men on that frieze. In this case, there is no confusing their long and tousled hairstyle with the shorter, more ordered locks of the Herakles head from Delphi; one might also allow for a certain tendency to idealize after the fashion of the ever-youthful Augustus himself. A closer look at the pattern of locks on the Herakles head reveals other affinities with the Type I portraits of Nero. At the centre of his forehead is a slight part in the bangs, though this portion of the Herakles head is admittedly only crudely worked out. Across the forehead of a Type I Nero in Detroit lies a tidy row of parallel locks, which all curve to left or right on

Dunant (1951), 307–308 (Delphi Museum 7181):

5

ÔA povli~ tw'n Delfw'n Qeokleva Eujdavmou Filokaivsara Neikopoleivthn ejpimelhteuvsanta ajreth'" e{Jneken kai eujnoiva" th'" eij" to;n qeo;n kai; th;n povlin ∆Apovllwni Puqivwi.

940

Pouilloux (1980a), 283–284 and 300. The other documents are FD III.1.530 (a base for a statue of Tiberius, erected whilst Theokles is still epimeletes since the present participle is used); FD III.1.312 (honours accorded Theokles by the people of Delphi); and SIG 3 791 (which repeats verbatim the text on the block recovered from the orchestra paving, except for ejpimelhth;n tw'n ∆Amfiktuovnwn in lieu of ejpimelhteuvsanta). 941

143

Pouilloux (1980a), 284.

Chapter V

reasonable to conjecture that the columns did not stand in the theatre until shortly before the first inscription was engraved upon one of them.947 The imprecision of Delphic chronology allows one to argue from historical probability and propose a date shortly before Nero's visit to Delphi in A.D. 67 for the reconstruction of the theatre and the carving of the Herakles frieze to adorn it.

enlarged, Roman-style stage had been added to the skene building, which is obvious from the straight edge of the paving where it would have met the pulpitum stage.942 Grooves for a parapet inserted around the edge of the orchestra at this time suggest that the stage was widened this far to the east and west for a total frontage of 12.1m. This is ample space for the Herakles frieze, whose total length would have been 9.9m. Pilasters or short columns between the panels, such as one sees along the front of the pulpitum stage of the Theatre of Dionysos at Athens probably made up the difference of 2.2m.943 In any case, raised borders along the panels' vertical edges indicate that they did not immediately adjoin one another.944 A number of columns of grey marble came to adorn the skene building in some fashion in the course of the same Roman restoration that enclosed the Theokles inscription in the orchestra paving. They furnish a terminus ante quem for the whole project, including the carving of the Herakles frieze. Three of these columns were covered with eighteen manumission inscriptions, all of which specify publication in the theatre and mention both the current archon and priests of Apollo.945 Although our chronology for Roman Delphi is imperfect, these inscriptions are all datable to between ca A.D. 50/55 and ca 85/90.946 Because all other surfaces in the theatre had already been covered with inscriptions by the first half of the 1st c. A.C., it is

Nero's visit to Delphi Nigel Kennell and Susan Alcock have clearly demonstrated in two recent articles that the reason for Nero's trip to Greece was to put himself forward as a contestant in the Empire's most prestigious series of games.948 For Nero the artiste, it would have been unthinkable not to come to Delphi and participate in the Pythian Games. The theatre of Delphi, not the stadium, was the venue for most of the events that Nero contested.949 It is thus more than coincidence that the theatre should have been renovated at this time. At about the same time, and after several decades of inactivity, the chairman of the Amphiktyony carried out a number of other repairs and renovations in or

947

In the west parodos, the inscriptions date to Priesthoods IX–XI (i.e. 139/8–108 B.C.), after which the parodos might have fallen into disuse if the giant statue base was at that point moved there and hindered traffic flow excessively. The more abundant inscriptions from the east parodos start at the same time but continue through Priesthood XV (i.e. as late as 60/59 B.C.). Along the wall of the podium for the first row of seats only two inscriptions were carved in the late Hellenistic period (FD III.6.10, 46), but another thirty-six suddenly appear there in the course of Priesthoods XXVI and XXVII, which roughly correspond to A.D. 1–40 in Daux's chronology. The exact dating of archonships and priesthoods in the Roman period is quite uncertain since a lower volume of inscriptions gives less scope for cross-checking than in previous periods. Even the relative arrangement of archonships within a Priesthood is often arbitrary in Daux's chronology ([1943], 77–95). Of possible help is the close similarity of script style, perhaps even the same engraver's hand, used on a number of inscriptions from the so–called Emperor's Monument (#421) at the northeast corner of the Apollo temple and on several of the theatre column inscriptions. Interestingly enough, the earliest inscriptions on the Emperor's Monument are Domitianic (FD III.4.87–119).

942 As one can see from the actual state plans of Hansen and Algreen-Ussing (1975), the front edge of the Hellenistic stage followed a line of extant blocks between the two paraskenia and had a width of 9.0m and depth of 3.1m. That these blocks formed the front of the earlier stage is suggested by the distance to them from the centre point of the orchestra, which is identical with the orchestra's radius (7.4m), once one excludes the Hellenistic drain ringing its northern perimetre. The edge of the orchestra paving indicates how far forward the Roman stage extended, and that it was about 1.7 or 1.8m deeper than its Hellenistic precursor 943

Lévêque (1951), 247–249.

944

The borders have a width of 15mm and a relief height of about 5mm. One interesting result of the enlarged stage and the low parapet coming out to meet its corners is that access to the auditorium from the parodoi, especially from the west parados, would have been difficult; and the east end of the diazoma may have been used for this purpose instead (Bommelaer [1992], 289). Much of the west parodos came to be occupied by a large statue base, quite possibly the statue of Dionysos seen by Pausanias near the theatre (10.32.1). Before it was moved to its present location, inverted, and inscribed with three manumission inscriptions of approximately the mid 1st c. A.C. (FD III.6.61–63), the base served as a dedication of the Knidians with 4th c. B.C. script: Knivdioi tw'i ∆Apovllwni ⁄ ajpo; tw'm polemivwn dekavtan (FD III.6.60). For the dating of manumission inscriptions from Delphi, see the standard work of Daux (1943). 945

948 949

Alcock (1995). Kennell (1988), 242–250.

We know from Philostratos that Nero was hailed as victor in the heralds' and the kitharodes' contests (Life of Apollonius 4.24, cf. 4.39, 7.12), but he surely entered other contests at the Pythian Games too. Before the theatre was built, these events were held in the Delphi stadium, upon a temporary, wooden stage built for the purpose. This is attested by an extraordinary inscription dating to the archonship of Dion (247/6 B.C.), which details all the preparations that the Amphiktyony had to undertake at Delphi before each Pythian Games (CID 2.139). An earlier inscription of the late 4th century B.C. (CID 2.101), which predates the construction of the present stadium by the Aetolians in ca 275 B.C. (Aupert [1992], 67–69), also mentions wooden constructions (skene, proskenion) inside the earlier stadium on the plain below Delphi. Satyros, a victorious auletes of the late 3rd or early 2nd century B.C. is recorded as having given a special encore presentation, including a piece of kithara music from the Bakchai of Euripides, in the stadium rather than the theatre (FD III.3.128), but this seems to have been exceptional (Bommelaer [1992], 299). For a description of a musical contest in the Delphi theatre during the Roman Imperial period, see Lucian, Adversus Indoctos 8–9.

FD III.6.125–142.

946

The manumission inscriptions from the theatre columns all belong to Priesthoods XXX through early(?) XXXIV, which corresponds roughly with dates in the late Claudian or early Neronian through Domitianic periods (Daux [1943], 84–90). The three earliest inscriptions on the theatre columns, those of Priesthood XXX, are dated to the archon years O27 (FD III.6.127), O29 (FD III.6.129), and O32 (FD III.6.126). The nearest archon year that might plausibly be attached to an absolute date is O38 in Priesthood XXXIII, which Daux connects with Nero's visit, though admittedly on shaky onomastic grounds (88).

144

Chapter V near the Apollo temenos.950 It is unknown whether one should associate all these projects with the sanctuary administration's desire to make a good impression upon the visiting emperor, or if they resulted from Nero's gift to Delphi of 100,000 denarii.951 But the theatre, at least, seems to have been repaired out of structural necessity and with whatever materials came most easily to hand. Jean-François Bommelaer has pointed out that the theatre is badly sited in terms of water runoff and erosion patterns.952 Spolia blocks from the Sikyonian Treasury were packed under the orchestra paving;953 and the blocks of the parapet around the orchestra were all taken from an unfinished, 4th century B.C. structure nearby.954

the Herakles frieze. This too was a calculated gesture: although Nero toured Greece in A.D. 66–67 as the new Apollo of cultural achievement, Suetonius mentions that he had intended to return to Greece for the Olympics of A.D. 71 and play the role of Hercules, which he had already begun to cultivate, by competing in the wrestling contest;955 and Cassius Dio even relates that Nero was acclaimed as Herakles upon his return to Rome in A.D. 67.956 Nor was Delphi the only place in Greece to have flattered Nero openly in this way: one of the coin types issued by the mint of Patrai to commemorate Nero's visit conflates him with Herakles;957 and there also exists a relief, apparently executed in connection with his plan to sever the Isthmus, that represents the emperor as Herakles.958 If one accepts that the Herakles of the Delphi frieze alludes to Nero, why then did the sculptor base the hairstyle upon an out-of-date Neronian type? The answer may be quite simple. One can see that the sculptor was not particularly accomplished and might suspect that he was local talent; but I believe that he had as his model the only two statues of Nero we know to have stood at Delphi, both of which were erected within two years of his accession in A.D. 54.959

On the other hand, some trouble was taken to provide a larger stage of contemporary style for the emperor's performances and to decorate the front edge of it with 950

The responsible epimeletes of the Neronian period was Tiberius Claudius Kleomachos of Nikopolis, whose term of office Jean Pouilloux assigned to after that of Publius Memmius Kleandros of Nikopolis (by A.D. 54/5) but before the Flavian date of Nikopolitan Tiberius Claudius Celsus's chairmanship (Pouilloux [1980a] 284–287). The texts are SIG3 813A (=FD III.3.181) and 813B. 951

Dio 62.14.2. As to the purpose of the gift, Homolle (1896), 712–713 speculates that it was meant for the reconstruction of the temple, but that Galba confiscated it before work could commence. The Dio passage also recounts Nero's petulant confiscation of Delphi's lands on the plain near Kirrha, but this might be a garbled (or anti-Neronian interpretation of) some reorganization of the sacred lands by the emperor. I suspect that the second possibility is the correct one and that the only structure to receive attentions before Nero's arrival was the theatre. This is more in keeping with a gradual pattern of recovery and reinstatement into prestige and imperial favour undergone by Delphi after the apparent nadir in its fortunes that followed the sacking of the temple by Thracian Maiadai in 86 B.C. and lasted until Claudius's resettlement decree of A.D. 52 (FD III.4.286). The Claudian document is incomplete, but did concern itself with the resettlement of Delphi's territory by a new body of citizens. The crucial portion of the text runs (lines 4–11):

955

Exiit opinio post scaenicas coronas proximo lustro descensurum eum ad Olympia inter athletas; nam et luctabatur assidue nec aliter certamina gymnica tota Graecia spectaverat quam brabeutarum more in stadio humi assidens ac, si qua paria longius recessissent, in medium manibus suis protrahens. Destinaverat etiam, quia Apollinem cantu, Solem aurigando aequiperare existimaretur, imitari et Herculis facta; praeparatumque leonem aiunt, quem vel clava vel brachiorum nexibus in amphitheatri harena spectante populo nudus elideret. 956

Dio 62.20.5 (cf. 63.10.1). Nero was also hailed as Apollo and with the agonistic titles of ∆Olumpionivkh~, Puqionivkh~, periodonivkh~ and pantonivkh~, for the meaning of which see Kennell (1988), 247–250.

ª...∆Epei; de;º nu'n levgetai kai; ªpolºeitw'n e[rhªmoº≥~≥ ei\nai w{ª~ moi a[rti ajphvggeile L. ∆Iouv-º nio~ Gallivwn oJ fªivlo~º mou ka≥ªi; a[nquºp≥ato~, ªboulovmeno~ tou;~ Delfou;~º e[ti e{xein to;n prªovteron kovsmon ejntelºh', ejªntevllomaiv se kai; ejx a[l-º lwn povlewn kal≥ªein eij~ tou;~ Delfou;~ nevou~ katoivkou~ kai;º 12 aujtoi'~ ejpitre≥vªpein . . . . . . . . . . º p≥resªbei'a pavnta e[cein ta; tw'n Del-º 10 fw'n wJ~ poleªivtai~ gegonovsin. ”Osoºi me;n ga;r tiª wJ~ poleiv-º tai metw/kivs≥ªanto eij~ touvtou~ tou;º~ tovpou~, krªivnw 5

957

Levy (1988), 131–135, pl. 26.8–15. The coin in question is inscribed HERCVLO AVGVSTO on the reverse and depicts a young and beardless hero in the weary pose of the Farnese type (pl. 26.12). Simultaneous issues of Patrai assimilate Nero with a beardless Iuppiter Liberator (pl. 26.9) and Apollo strumming a kithara (pl. 26.15). Another reverse type declares the ADVENTVS AVGVSTI. What chronologically connect these and the other reverse types are a few, closely shared obverse dies, which themselves exhibit a portrait of Nero in the style current on his Roman issues of A.D. 64–68. I am very grateful to Brooks Levy at Princeton University's Firestone Library for bringing these coins to my notice. 958

The Claudian document may have gone on to ratify or reinstate the system of sacred lands that generated rent revenue for the sanctuary and was to become the subject of much correspondence between sanctuary officials and emperors in the later 1st and the 2nd centuries A.C. If so, the same fund (oiJ provsodoi tou' qeou') that easily paid for the Pythia's new house, new retaining walls, etc. after the windfall of Nero's visit may earlier have been tapped less lavishly to repair the theatre and make a good impression upon the emperor.

Arafat (1996), 151 and n.33. Salowey (1994), 94, pl. 29a.

959

Homolle (1896), 710–711. The first statue (Delphi Museum 3455) was erected between 13th October, A.D. 54 and 1st January, A.D. 55:

5

952

Bommelaer (1992), 298. Topographical instability may have caused the abortion of original construction work in ca 200 B.C. 953

Georges Roux (1950) found no traces of a pre-Roman orchestra, even though he carried his sondages right down to bedrock. 954

Suetonius, Nero 53:

ª ºaio~ Sebastou', kai; German≥ªikºou' Kaivsaro~ e[kgonon, qeou' Sebasªtºou' ajpovgonon, Kaivsara, Sebaªsto;ºn, Germaniko;n, ajrciereva, dh ªmarºcikh'" ejxousiva", Aujtokravtora, to; koivnon tw'n ∆Amfiktuovnwn vacat ejpi; iJerevw" tw'n Sebastw'n kai; ejpimelhtou' ∆Amfiktuovnwn Poplivou Memmivou Kleavndrou.

The second statue (no inventory number) was erected sometime in the year A.D. 55:

Bommelaer (1991), 211.

145

Chapter V

both recall the harsh, but traditional, measures that Domitian reinstated to deal with Vestal Virgins who had broken their vow of chastity.962 The biography by Suetonius also records how the emperor observed religious sanction meticulously when he demolished the tomb that an imperial freedman had built for his son from stone blocks already consecrated for use in the rebuilding of the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus.963 Suetonius and Cassius Dio connected these measures with Domitian's assumption of the censorship in A.D. 85, in what Suetonius considered a programme of steps to correct public morals (correctio morum).964 The emperor's self-imposed mandate was too onerous to discharge in the single year allotted to that office; so later in A.D. 85 he took the hitherto, and thereafter, unprecedented step of declaring himself censor perpetuus.965

Introduction to Domitian The emperor Domitian has in recent years undergone rehabilitation at the hands of scholars such as Brian Jones who have striven to present a more balanced picture of the emperor than that afforded by his biographers.960 Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cassius Dio each had their own reasons for representing that emperor's actions and intentions in a certain light, to the detriment of a balanced, non-partisan assessment comprehending more than just the effect of Domitian's reign on the Roman élite. Evenhandedness is too much, and altogether the wrong thing, to expect from ancient historians. Instead, it is left to the epigraphic record in the provinces to redress the balance. I leave to others the moral appraisal of Domitian's character and rule but do maintain that its severity was not egregious by the standards of the time, that he was in fact respected by the provincials for his stern fairness, and that he was both a keen administrator and reinstator of lapsed traditions, particularly religious ones, in the fashion of Augustus. Thus, this section will show how Domitian was the first emperor to sponsor Delphi consistently, as opposed to the seemingly spontaneous nature of Nero's benefactions. Domitian and his agents built up the Delphic sanctuary and its religious life, which included the Pythian Games. These actions laid the basis for the Roman efflorescence of Delphi that one reads of in Plutarch's Pythian dialogues, but which is commonly assigned to the time of Hadrian. Finally, it is possible that Delphi's Pythian Games furnished Domitian with the model for the Capitoline Games he established in Rome in A.D. 86.

Stern and somewhat forbidding, he saw himself, like Augustus, as the supervisor of laws and morals. ...But the similarity went further than mere words. His ideal seems to have been a return to Augustan standards, and not only in monetary matters. He was just as uncompromising in his approach to religion; and he was further influenced by two factors, the Flavians' need to bolster the new dynasty with supernatural support and his personally sincere belief in the traditional religion. Domitian's benefactions and administration Domitian's consolidation of traditional religious practices is also obvious from the inclusion of numerous temples and shrines in his massive

Domitian's religious conservatism At the outset, it bears mentioning that Domitian was a pious proponent of traditional religious practices. Whether this was simply the result of personal religiosity or one exigency of a policy to restore the ideal society of the old days is debatable —many of his measures are reminiscent of Augustus's— yet irrelevant to this argument. Domitian's respect for tradition is exemplified in both the literary and archaeological record. From the former, we have the glowing, yet not necessarily inaccurate, praise of Martial.961 The biographers Suetonius and Cassius Dio

5

sic nova dum condis, revocas, Auguste, priora: debentur quae sunt quaeque fuere tibi. 962

incesta Vestalium virginum, a patre quoque suo et fratre neglecta, varie et serie coercuit, priora capitali supplicio, posteriora more veteri. nam cum Oculatis sororibus, item Varronillae liberum mortis permisisset arbitrium corruptoresque earum relegasset, mox Corneliam maximam virginem absolutam olim, dein longo intervallo repetitam atque convictam defodi imperavit stupratoresque virgis in Comitio ad necem caedi, excepto praetorio viro, cui, dubia etiam tum causa et incertis quaestionibus atque tormentis de semet professo, exilium indulsit. Cf. Cassius Dio 67.3.3-4, whose account survives at this point in a Byzantine epitome but appears to be an abbreviated and garbled version of Suetonius's.

ªNevrwna Klºa≥uvdion Kaivsªara, Sebasto;n, Germaniko;n,º ∆Arcierh' Mevgªiston, dhmarcikh'" ejxousiva"º to; B—, Aujtokrªavtora to; B— (?)º, ªu{pºa≥ton, ∆Apovªllwni ª aJ povliº" tw'n Dªelfw'n.º

960

B.W. Jones (1992).

961

8.80:

Suetonius, Domitian 8.3-4:

963

Suetonius, Domitian. 8.5.

964

Suetonius, Domitian 8.3.

965

B.W. Jones (1992), 99. Domitian's assumption of the censorship and his indefinite prorogation of it ought both to be dated to A.D. 85 on numismatic evidence. Coins of this year, which are securely dated by the enumeration of renewed tribunician power as well as multiple imperatorial acclamations and consulships, initially bear the title CENS, which is quickly replaced by CENS PERP and variants on this abbreviation for the remainder of his reign. The two major corpora for coins of Domitian are RIC II and BM Coins, Rom. Emp. II.

Sanctorum nobis miracula reddis avorum nec pateris, Caesar, saecula cana mori cum veteres Latiae ritus renovantur harenae et pugnat virtus simpliciore manu. Sic priscis servatur honos te praeside templis et casa tam culto sub Iove numen habet;

146

Chapter V

Vespasian, the other to the deified Titus;979 an adjoining temple to Minerva Chalcidicia;980 a temple to Fortuna Redux, which he erected to commemorate his Sarmatian triumph of A.D. 93;981 a dynastic mausoleum called the Templum Gentis Flaviae;982 a temple to Ianus Quadrifrons in his new Forum Transitorium;983 and a temple to Iuppiter Custos, which replaced the sacellum to Iuppiter Conservator where he found refuge on 19th December, A.D. 69.984 Domitian's extensive reconstruction work after the devastating fire of A.D. 80 is a measure of the piety incumbent upon any conscientious emperor, but the lavishness of his endowment, especially of the temple of Capitoline Jupiter, went far beyond what was strictly necessary. Furthermore, the spontaneous construction of altars and new temples by Domitian is ample indication of his respect for religion in those aspects with a particular and personal appeal.

programme of rebuilding at Rome over the course of his reign.966 Those religious structures known to have been restored by Domitian are the following: the Atrium Vestae,967 the Casa Romuli,968 the Pantheon,969 the temple of Castor and Minerva,970 the temple of the deified Augustus,971 the Iseum and Serapeum,972 the temple of Iuppiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline hill,973 the temple of Iuppiter Tonans,974 the temple of Pax,975 and the temple of Veiovis.976 Domitian also completed the temple of the deified Vespasian (and Titus) begun by his brother Titus on 3rd January, A.D. 87.977 He furthermore erected a number of new structures: an altar to Vulcan in each regio of the city;978 the Templum Divorum, which was a porticus with an a e d e s at each end, one to the deified

966

B.W. Jones (1992), 79-96. Suetonius, Domitian. 5, 13.2. Cassius Dio 67.24.2.

It was one thing for the emperor to shower benefactions upon the city were he spent most of his reign, but the same pattern may be discerned in the provinces too. The record outside of Italy is principally epigraphic, not literary, which means that what survives is a random selection of his actions and benefactions rather than the most salient points of any programme. Nevertheless, the available evidence is sufficient to portray Domitian as both philhellene and administrator. B.W. Jones summarizes the evidence for his philhellenism:985

967

B.W. Jones (1992), 88-89. The dwelling of the Vestals was one of several public buildings damaged in the fire of A.D. 80. 968

B.W. Jones (1992), 89. Martial 8.80.6. This was the supposed home of Romulus atop the Palatine Hill that Augustus had first restored. 969

B.W. Jones (1992), 90. J.C. Anderson (1983), 99 and n.20; cf. Cassius Dio 66.24.2. The Pantheon was another casualty of the fire of A.D. 80. 970

B.W. Jones (1992), 91. C.J. Anderson (1983), 101. Martial 9.3.10–12. The aedes Castoris was founded in 484 B.C. (Livy 2.42.5). 971

His concern for Greek culture is abundantly attested. He was the first emperor to become eponymous archon at Athens where his cult was associated with that of Zeus Eleutherios; he was also eponymous strategos at Pergamon and heiromnamon at Byzantium986. At his own expense he saw to the restoration of the temple of Apollo at Delphi in 84 (ILS 8905) and to extensions at Ephesus to the temple of Artemis: hence the many references to him in inscriptions there. He also encouraged the cult of Asclepius at Pergamon and that of Demeter

B.W. Jones (1992), 91. Blake (1959), 124 n.101. Martial 5.53.12; cf. Cassius Dio 56.46.3, 57.10.2; Pliny, N.H. 12.94. The temple of the deified Augustus had been destroyed in a fire before A.D. 79 and was rebuilt by Domitian in connection with a new shrine to Minerva. 972

B.W. Jones (1992), 91–92. C.J. Anderson (1983), 96. Martial 2.14.7, 10.48.1. Juvenal 9.22. Eutropius 7.23. Cf. Josephos, Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.4; Lucan 8.831; and Cassius Dio 66.24.2. The Serapeum was apparently a new addition to a temple of Isis that had been damaged in the fire of A.D. 80. 973

B.W. Jones (1992), 92; cf. Gsell (1894), 92-93. Martial 9.1.5, 9.3.7, 13.74.2. Statius, Silvae 1.6.102, 3.4.105, 4.3.160. Silius Italicus, Punica 3.622. Suetonius, Domitian 5. Plutarch, Publicola 15.4. Zosimos, 5.38.4. Prokopios, Vand. 3.5. Cf. Suetonius, Vitellius 15.3, Vespasian 8.5; and Cassius Dio 65.17.3, 66.24.2. This famous temple had last burned down in the fire of A.D. 80. 974

B.W. Jones (1992), 92; cf. Blake (1959), 101. Pliny, Natural history 36.50. Domitian repaired this Augustan building after the fire of A.D. 80.

979

B.W. Jones (1992), 87. C.J. Anderson (1983), 96. Nash (1961), 304. Blake (1959), 112-113, n.159 and 161. Scott (1936), 62–63. Platner and Ashby (1929), 152.

975

B.W. Jones (1992), 92. C.J. Anderson (1983), 101. Statius, Silvae 4.3.17. Cf. Josephos, B.J. 8.158; Cassius Dio 65.15.1; and Martial 1.2.5. Domitian altered the location of the Vespasianic original.

980

B.W. Jones (1992), 88; Anderson (1983), 97; E. Nash, Pictorial dictionary of ancient Rome, vol. 2, London: A. Zwemmer, 1962, 67.

976

B.W. Jones (1992), 93. Blake (1959), 102. Cf. Vitruvius 4.8.4; and Aulus Gellius 5.12. This temple had also been damaged in the conflagration of A.D. 80. 977

981

B.W. Jones (1992), 87. Martial 8.65.8-9.

982

B.W. Jones (1992), 87-88. C.J. Anderson (1983), 97. Blake (1959), 114. Gsell (1894), 114 and n.4. Martial 9.3.12. Statius, Silvae 4.3.19, 5.1.240-241. Suetonius, Domitian. 1.1, 17.3.

B.W. Jones (1992), 93-94. CIL 6.938.

978

B.W. Jones (1992), 84; CIL 6.826 (= ILS 4914 =FIRA III.75). In this document, Domitian fulfills a vow by reconsecrating an open area sacred to the Volcanales that is demarcated by cippi and with an altar below. He lays down provisions that no one is to encroach upon this land or develop it at all and specifies when and what the annual sacrifice is to be. The text makes it clear that Domitian believed he was assuring the goodwill of the god Vulcan by making good on an unfulfilled vow of Nero's, after the fire of A.D. 64, to erect these altars.

983

B.W. Jones (1992), 88. Nash (1961), 505. Blake (1959), 106. Martial 10.28.6. 984

B.W. Jones (1992), 88. Tacitus, Histories 3.74. Suetonius, Domitian. 5. Cf. Blake (1959), 101 nn.34–35.

147

985

B.W. Jones (1992), 112.

986

Devreker (1982), 515.

Chapter V at Ephesus987. Apart from these, he contributed to works of various kinds at Anazarbus, Aphrodisias, Cyrene, Isauria, Limyra, Lindos, Megalopolis, Priene, Sebaste, Stratonicea and Termessos988.

prominence is the emperor's place as the gracious recipient of his own generosity to Ephesos. Whereas imperial self-promotion and provincial adulation were epigraphic conventions, Domitian's apparent preoccupation with minutiae, is a recurring motif in his bureaucracy and does reflect a real concern for results through administrative accountability.992

And yet these favours were scarcely disinterested, for Domitian the emperor was less attentive to Hellenic culture per se than he was to the imperial image he wished to project, just as earlier emperors had done, regardless of personal inclination989:

In A.D. 86/7, Domitian again took an administrative interest in the Artemis sanctuary at Ephesos when he instructed that a horos be established there.993 The current proconsul Asiae, P. Nonius Asprenas Caesius Cassianus, was on hand for the ceremony and represented the emperor:994

His ideal included a specific cultural as well as political role for the emperor and his court: they were to be the source of encouragement, the fountain-head, to the ruler's greater glory.

ªkata; th;n aujtokravtoro" Kaivsaro" Dometianou'º Sebaªstou' Germanºikou' dªiatagºh;n o{ro" iJerou' cwrªeivouº th'" ∆Artevmido" teqei;" ªejºpi; Poplivou Nwnivou ∆Asprhvna Kaisivou Kaªsºsªianou'º ajnqupªavtºou parovnto" ejpi; tou;" tovpou"

The mingling of Domitian's benefactions with administration is well illustrated by two documents from the sanctuary of Artemis at Ephesos. In the first, the neokorate polis of Ephesos dedicates to Ephesian Artemis and to Domitian the paving of an area in the sanctuary called the Enbolon that was undertaken at his own expense:990

The reason for placing a horos was primarily to define, or redefine, a boundary, in this case that of the sacred cwrei'on, i.e. the lands belonging to the sanctuary rather than the sacred area itself. The secondary significance of this act was economic: the lands belonging to sanctuaries were often leased out to provide the cult with income.995 In the case of Ephesian Artemis, one may reasonably suppose that there had arisen a dispute between sanctuary officials and some landholders of Ephesos over the status of some real estate; the two aggrieved parties then brought their dispute before Domitian, who either decreed or negotiated a solution and had the provincial governor see that it was duly observed. This is precisely what happened in the case of another resolved boundary dispute preserved on an inscription of A.D. 87 from near Sirte, though in this case the solution was arrived at through negotiation and not imperial decree.996 Indeed, territorial disputes are frequently encountered in the dealings of Greek cities

ª∆Aºrtªevmºidi ∆Efesiva (sic) kaiv ªaujºtokravtori ª·Dometianw'i‚ Kºaivsari Sebastw'i ª·Germanikw'i‚ hJº newkovro" ª∆Eºfesivwn povli" kateskeuasen ejk tw'n ijdivwn th;n strw'sin tou' ∆Enbovlou ªkaºqiªerwvsaºvto" Mavrªkou ∆Atºeilªivou Poºstoªuvmouº Bradoªuvaº ajnqupavtou, politeusamevnou kai;teleiwvsanto 5 Mavrkou Tigellivou Louvpou filokaivsaro" tou' ªgºramªmatevw" tou'º dhvmou As one can see, the Secretary of the Demos, one M. Tigellius Lupus, handled both the administrative liaison between emperor and civic authority and the financial details; the completed projected was then dedicated by the proconsul Asiae himself, M. Atilius Postumus Bradua.991 Two other items are obviously of greater moment than the benefaction itself. In the first place, much attention is paid to how it was accomplished, i.e. the actual details of administrative procedure. But of greater importance by its

987

992 B.W. Jones (1992) frequently uses the word minutiae to characterize the degree of Domitian's personal involvement in his administration (e.g. 76, his reforms of the silver coinage in A.D. 82 and 85; 101-102, his application of archaic religious penalties; 110, his interest in keeping provincial governors honest). 993

Devreker (1982), 515.

988

Devreker (1982), 515–516. Levick (1982), 61; and eadem (1985), 85-86.

McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 147, #497. For the Roman governor see Eck (1974b), cols. 285–286; and Groag (1936), col. 874.

989 B.W. Jones (1992), 13. Even Domitian's replacement at great personal expense of texts destroyed by fire in the libraries of Alexandria (Suetonius, Domitian. 20), had an ulterior motive, Jones maintains. The liberalia studia of his early years and even his youthful poetry (Suetonius, Domitian. 2.2, 20) were entirely in keeping with the education prescribed for, and fostered among, the Roman élite of his day (Jones [1992], 12-13) and do not necessarily indicate a natural disposition to culture and its sponsorship in Greek lands.

995

This is known to have happened at Delphi between the 4th and 2nd centuries B.C. (Rousset [1991]). Cassius Dio 62.14.2 records that the sacred lands of the Delphic sanctuary still existed in A.D. 67 for Nero to confiscate. The use of these lands by Delphians was still an issue in Hadrian's day (Jannoray [1944–45], 76). 996

McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 122, #450: [ex a]uctorit. [i]mp. divi Vespasiani f. ·Domitiani‚ Aug. Germ. pont. max. trib. pot. VI imp. XIIII cos. XIII cens. perpet. p.p. iussu Suelli Flacci leg. Aug. pro pr. terminus posit inter nationem Muduciuviorum e[t] Zamuciorum ex conventione utrarumque nationum.

990

McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 56, #142 (=Ephesos III, 99-101, #8).

991

Dabrowa (1980), 39 n.142.

994

PIR2 A 1303. Groag (1903). Von Rohden (1896).

148

Chapter V with Hellenistic monarchs and Roman emperors, and a good example of this genre comes from the town of Delphi, where a lengthy dossier of bilingual inscriptions describes the town's territorial boundaries vis à vis its neighbours', as determined by Trajan's specially-appointed corrector, C. Avidius Nigrinus.997

of a canal and the strengthening of a fort in Aphrodito, Egypt (ca A.D. 84).1004 Whereas Domitian's attentions to Delphi are the best documented in Achaea, they were not the only ones in the province.1005 In June, A.D. 77, an earthquake devastated Corinth. Less than a year later, the emperor Vespasian had already begun to rebuild the city, as a fragmentary Latin inscription of thanksgiving appears to indicate.1006 It was in honour of this extensive rebuilding that Corinth changed its official name to Colonia Iulia Flavia Augusta Corinthus, which it kept until the assassination of Domitian in A.D. 96; and this was the name it placed on the first issues of local coinage (ca A.D. 83) that it had struck since A.D. 68.1007. The death of Vespasian in A.D. 79, soon after the earthquake, left the completion of reconstruction work to his sons Titus and Domitian.1008 This project was not yet completed when Titus died himself about two years later, as is indicated by an inscription engraved no earlier than A.D. 84 that records Domitian's completion of the Propylaea.1009 The wealthy city of Corinth did not lack for private donors either, among whom were the archhiereus P. Licinius Iuventianus Priscus, as well as two unknown individuals who made a gift of Temple E and the Odeion's new scaenae frons.1010

Other administrative measures of Domitian's in Asia Minor concerned urban life: he granted municipium status to Laodikeia, and possibly to KreteiaFlaviopolis, Lora-Flaviopolis, and Flavio-Kaisare; he also granted to Sala (Domitianopolis) and to Kilikian Diokaisareia the right to issue coins; and he granted both privileges to the Mokkadenoi centres of Silandos and Temenothyrai.998 Three Domitianic municipium charters found in Spain prescribe procedures for civic administration so detailed that future intervention by the Roman administration must have been rare.999 The public works that Domitian bestowed upon the eastern provinces were benefactions of another sort. Outside Achaea province, Domitian was responsible for the building of roads in Moesia Superior (A.D. 92/3),1000 and in Asia Minor (in A.D. 82 and 92); 1001 an aqueduct at Lilybaeum (A.D. 84);1002 a bridge in Koptos, Egypt (A.D. 90);1003 and both the excavation

Restoration of the Dodekaïs 997

FD III.4.290-296.

It should not come as a surprise that Domitian encouraged the revival in Greece of certain religious practices that had fallen into desuetude with the same interest that he demonstrated at Rome. In the same

998

B.W. Jones (1992), 112; cf. A.H.M. Jones (1971), 81, 93, 159160, 210; and Devreker (1982), 513, 515. 999

B.W. Jones (1992), 112-113. Domitian's attentions to Spain continued his father's policies and focused particulary on civic government: the best example of this are the extensive fragments of the civic charters (leges) of the municipia of Sapensa, Malaga (for both of which, see Lewis and Reinhold [1966], 321-326 and Levick [1985], 25-30), and Irni. This last charter was discovered mostly intact in 1981 (H. Horstkotte, "Dekurionat und römisches Bürgerrecht nach der Lex Irnitana," ZPE 78 [1989], 169-177). The Irni charter is valuable because it shows that Domitian went beyond merely ratifying his father's initiatives of granting Latin rights to Salpensa and Malaga by extending the privilege to perhaps 129 other towns. This policy indicates both a concern for efficient administration and also a shrewd way of enticing the provincials to embrace Romanization in the hope full Roman citizenship. The Irni charter shows that town administrators had considerable discretion in numerous responsibilities and independence from the provincial government —which is rarely mentioned in the long document; and the letter of A.D. 91 that Domitian appended to the lex may also betoken a personal interest in the town's administration.

1004

McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 93, #335. Cf. Garzetti (1974), 278. 1005

Besides the works that Domitian and his family undertook at Corinth, a bilingual inscription from Megalopolis records how he completely rebuilt at his own expense a stoa that had burned down (IG V.2.457: " ...funditus s. p. restituit."). Mention of Domitian's tribunician power secures its date between 14th September, A.D. 93 and 13th September, A.D. 94. 1006

West (1931), #20. For the earthquake see: Suetonius, Vespasian 17; Malalas, Chronographica X, p.261 (Bonn); Plutarch, De anima, frag. VII, #11 (Dübner, V, p.12); Orosius 7.9.11; and Eusebius, Chronicorum canonum.. 1007

Corinthian coins bearing the names of the annualduoviri were minted as late as Galba's reign (A.D. 68). The next local issues thereafter appeared in Domitian's reign, at some point after he adopted the title of Germanicus in A.D. 83; and the city is frequently called COL. IVL. FLAV. AVG. COR in the reverse inscription of these issues. After Domitian, Corinthian coins were minted in every reign from Trajan's through Caracalla's. Elsewhere in the province, the colony of Patrai also resumed its own coinage under Domitian after a similar hiatus of about fifteen years.

1000

McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 117, #420. The road from Taliata had been damaged by the ravages of time and the flooding of the Danube; and repairs were carried out by the legio VII Claudia. 1001

Road of A.D. 82: McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 117, #423 (=ILS 268). A milestone found near Ankyra records that Domitian instructed A. Caesennius Gallus, his legatus pro praetore, to pave roads throughout Asia Minor in the provinces of Galatia, Cappadocia, Pontus, Pisidia, Paphlagonia, Lycaonia, and Armenia Minor. Road of A.D. 92: McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 117, #422 (=IGRR IV.1194a). This bilingual milestone near Thyatira in Lydia records the emperor's rebuilding of the roads, without any mention of a legatus or any other agent. 1002 1003

1008

Kent (1966), #84 and 85 are two fragmentary texts inscribed upon marble components of the Corinth theatre, which was rebuilt after the earthquake of A.D. 77, though in both cases it is impossible to determine whether Titus or Domitian is indicated. 1009

McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 115, #410 (=ILS 5753).

1010

Kent (1966), #86.

Priscus: IG IV2 203. Temple E donation: Kent (1966), #333. Scaenae frons donation: Kent (1966), #334.

McCrum and Woodhead (1961), 115, #411.

149

Chapter V

are attested in the next thirty years.1015 It did not outlive him, however; and Domitian revived it for the last time almost a century later.1016 The personnel who made these final pilgrimmages to Delphi were many fewer than they had been for the Hellenistic Pythaïs expeditions and even the Dodekaïdes of Augustus. Besides the priest of Pythian Apollo, the others who came were the keryx of Pythian Apollo, the priest of Hermes Patroös, a m a n t i s , an a u l e t e s , and a hieropoios.1017 In the inscription dating to Domitian's Athenian archonship, all but one of those who came to Delphi to make the Dodekaïs sacrifice (ªqºuv s onte" th;n dwdekh/'da boªuvº⁄pªrºwron, lines 3–4) hailed from Marathon, probably because the priest of Pythian Apollo at Athens, one (Tib. Claudius) Hipparchos, was a Marathonian himself. This Hipparchos was none other than the grandfather of the celebrated tycoon Herodes Atticus. Later in the reign of Domitian, the Dodekaïs was sent from Athens for a final time:1018

year, or shortly afterwards, that Domitian's money saw to the repair of the Apollo temple at Delphi (A.D. 84), he was eponymous archon at Athens. An inscription carved into a wall of the Athenian Treasury at Delphi records that during this term of office he revived the Dodekaïs expedition to Delphi: 1011 ª∆Eºpi; aªujºtokravtoroª~º Kaivsaroª~ Sebºastou' Dªo-º ªmºitianou' Germanikou' Dio;~ ∆Eleuqeªrºivou a[rcontoª~º ªejºn ∆Aqhvnai~, oi{de h\lqon ªqºuvsonte~ th;n dwdekh/'da boªu-vº pªrºwron: oJ kh'rux ∆Apovlªlwnºo~ Puqivou kai; iJereu;~ ÔErmou' 5 Patrw/vou ªKºhruvkwn ªFivlwnº Fivlwno~ Maraqwvnio~, iJeropoio;~ Poªlevºmªwn Fivlwnºo~ Maraqwvnio~, mavnti~ Fiªlºhvmwn ∆Azhnieªuv~, aujlhth;~º Filovmouso~ Maraqwvniªoº~. ª∆Eºpi; ªiJerevwº~ ejn ª∆Aºqhvnaiª~ ∆Apovllwnºo~ Puqivou ÔIppavrcou tou' ªÔHrwvdou Maraqwnivoºu, ejn ªDelfoi'~ de; Eºujqudavmou kai; Eujkleªivdaº.

5

This ceremonial procession was sent from Athens at irregular intervals and culminated in the sacrifice of an ox and games at the Apollo sanctuary.1012 Our first mentions of the ceremony date from the Classical period, when it was called the Pythaïs, but it all but ceased after the sack of Athens by Sulla.1013 Augustus revived the pilgrimage, with the new title of Dodekaïs, immediately after Actium;1014 and five occurences of it

10

15 1011

FD III.2.65. A date no earlier than A.D. 84/5 is confirmed by Domitian's title of Germanicus. On the other hand, both Euthydamos and Eukleides are still alive as priests of Apollo at Delphi (see note 1106). The assimilation of Domitian with Zeus Eleutherios is reminiscent of Nero in A.D. 67, particularly the latter's ‘freedom of Greece’ proclamation (SIG3 814) and late-Neronian coins of Patrai (Levy [1988], 131–135, pl. 26.8–15). For another inscription from the archonship of Domitian, see the ephebic catalogue IG II2 1996 (A.D. 84/5–92/3).

20

“Arconto~ ªejn Delºfoªi'~ . . . . . .º a, iJerevwn de; tou' ∆Apovllwnªo~º tou' Puqivou G—.— M——.— Eujqudavmou kªa-º i; Eujkleivdou tou' ∆Astoxevnou, mhno;~ Baqwvou, ejn ∆Aqhvnai~ de; iJerevw~ tou' Puqivou tou' ajrcierevw~ T——i—.— K——l—.— ÔIppavrcou Maraqwnivªou, iJerev-º w~ de;ª. . . . ºnai;ªou tou' . . . . º ª . . ºgou ª . . . . . . . . . . º ∆Agaqh/' ªtuvch/. To;nº meta; ÔRªou'ºfon a[rconta ejniauto;n ejn ∆Aqhnai~, mhno;~ Bohdromiw'no~, oiJ penfqevnte~ (e)ij~ Delfou;~ kata; th;n manteivan tou' qeou' uJpo; ∆Aqhnaivwn ejpi; th;n th'~ dwdekh/'do~ bouv(p)rwron qusivan tw/' qew/' e[qusan kata; tªa;º pavtria: oJ iJereu;~ tou; Patrw/vou Khruvkwn ÔErmou'

1012

For a complete (in 1906) set of documents pertaining to the Hellenistic Pythaïs and Roman Dodekaïs expeditions and a diachronic discussion of the rite, see Colin (1906) and FD III.2, pp. 11–70.

1015 FD III.2.59–64. For a revised chronology of these inscriptions, see Daux (1943), 74–77. 1016

See Paul Graindor (1931b) 105–106 for an account of Domitian's revival of the Dodekaïs.

1013

I am grateful to Dr. T.L. Shear Jr. for pointing me towards the Classical sources for the Pythaïs pilgrimage. For an overview of its early history, see Strabo 9.2.11 and Parsons (1943), 235–238. The Pythaïs is of uncertain antiquity but certainly existed by the 5th c. B.C. One of the earliest epigraphic witnesses is a 4th c. B.C. horos stone that originally marked the edge of the procession's sacred road from the Pythion on the Akropolis's north slope to Delphi (237 and n.122):

5

1017

The priesthood of Hermes Patroös was a hereditary perquisite of the Kerykes family (FD III.2, p. 67). The term iJeropoi'o" had been out of use since the 4th c. B.C. and its latter-day redeployment was no doubt a self-conscious evocation of the Classical past, perhaps under the emperor's influence. In any case, the resumption of lapsed practices such as this was to become quite usual by the 2nd c. A.C.

1018 FD III.2.66 is dated by lines 11 to 13: to;nº meta; ÔRªou'⁄fon a[rconta ejniauto;n⁄ ejn ∆Aqhvnai". The archonship of Trebellius Rufus is traditionally assigned to sometime in the period A.D. 86/7–95/6, and more likely earlier in that range than later because it shares a number of the same personnel with FD III.2.65: the priest of Pythian Apollo at Athens is still Tib. Claudius Hipparchos; those at Delphi are still Euthydamos and Eukleides (see note 1106); the priest of Hermes Patroös of the Kerykes cum herald of Pythian Apollo is still Philon the son of Philon; the seer is still Philemon of deme Azeniai; and the fluteplayer remains Philomousos, no doubt a slave. The passage of time is however indicated by the transfer of the post of hieropoios from Polemon to Philon, his son one supposes.

o{ro" iJera'" oJdo' diæ h|" poreuvetai hJ Puqai>;" ej" Delfo–v".

For the cessation of the Pythaïs, see, for instance, Aelius Aristides 13.189. 1014

For the connection of the Augustan Dodekaïs with the Hellenistic Pythaïs, see Graindor (1931a), 141–142. The new name indicates that a dozen victims were sacrificed at Delphi, of which the eponymous ox was the first (FD III.2, p. 66).

150

Chapter V 25

30

kai; kh'rux ∆Apovllwno~ Puqivou Fivlwn Fivlwno~ Maraqwvnio~, iJeropoio;~ Fivlwn Polevmwno~ Maraqwvnio~, oJ ejk Khruvkwn kai; Eujneidw'n Poªlevºmwn Fivlwnoª~ Mar-º aqwvnio~, mavnti~ Fiªlhv-º mwn, aujlhth;~ Filovmouso~.

sacred bird, and a laurel wreath, the traditional victor's in the Pythian Games.1022 What prompted Titus, and his brother shortly thereafter, to supplicate the gods so earnestly was one, or both, of two disasters that befell Rome in A.D. 80, a great fire and a great plague.1023 The previous year had been reckoned calamitous too by the obliteration of Pompeii and other settlements on the Bay of Naples in the eruption of Vesuvius. In times such as these, Romans turned to traditional remedies. One might justifiably suggest that repairs to the venerable temple of Apollo at Delphi began at this time, because the great inscription at Delphi signifies only that they were completed sometime in the period of 6th January to 13th September, A.D. 84. The original idea might conceivably have been that of Titus, who was in fact eponymous archon at Delphi in A.D. 79.1024.

One notes with interest both the strong representation of Marathon deme and that the priest Hipparchos did not actually make the trip to Delphi for the sacrifice, though it would be unwarranted to attribute this to apathy, rather than, say, infirmity. Another anomaly is the inclusion of an additional representative of the Kerykes and Euneidai families of Athens.1019 However, it is fair to say that since no later emperors chose to resuscitate the Dodekaïs anew, its appeal and importance had already faded by the end of Augustus's reign. Indeed, these inscriptions of the two Domitianic Dodekaïdes reveal that their personnel were drawn almost exclusively from the deme of Marathon: they were, in all likelihood, kinsmen and neighbours of Hipparchos whom he enrolled upon receiving the archon Domitian's request for the reinstitution of this ceremony. The coincidence of the Dodekaïs's resumption after so long a time was surely the result of personal involvement by the emperor, even if the precise details are unknown.1020

Although Domitian might have restored the Apollo temple out of piety towards the gods or respect for his late brother's wishes, his continued patronage of the site in the succeeding years bespeaks another sort of interest. It is likely that Domitian was also influenced by his own, much-maligned, interest in culture, particularly literature, and suggestions from the likes of Plutarch and other Greeks at Rome. It was under the Flavian dynasty that Plutarch went to Rome to give lectures and made a number of life-long contacts among his contemporaries in the élite of the city.1025 Despite his autobiographical reticence, enough can be reconstructed of Plutarch's career to say that he reached his peak of celebrity and influence during the reign of Domitian.1026 This is not to suggest that he necessarily had the ear of the emperor, but where there was a Plutarch openly promoting Greece, and especially the Delphi he knew so well, there must surely have been other Greeks of similar sentiment and potentially greater influence. The possibility also exists that Delphi sent an embassy to the new emperor to explain their plight and found him already

Why Domitian aided Delphi It is not surprising that an emperor should devote resources to the rebuilding of a provincial capital such as Corinth; but why should Domitian have been the patron of Delphi throughout his reign? The answer is three-fold: piety, cultural interest, and persuasion. Evidence of Domitian's piety has already been presented. But of more particular relevance in this connection is a programme of traditional placation of the gods, though on a grander scale than usual. In addition to his repair, embellishment, or building anew of sanctuaries and temples in Rome, the earliest gold and silver coins of the new reign (A.D. 81–82) attest to the public supplication of divine favour by means of a sellisternium. These coins continue the reverse types of his brother Titus's issues and display a couch (pulvinar) adorned with the attributes of one or more gods; the gods most often alluded to are Jupiter, Juno, Neptune, and Apollo.1021 Apollo's imagery is conventional, but in explicit reference to the Apollo of Delphi nevertheless: above a tripod with streaming fillets swims a dolphin (delfiv " ), whilst upon its rim there is sometimes represented a perching raven, his

1019

1022

RIC II, pl. 59.4. This silver denarius was, on the basis of Domitian's titles in the obverse legend, one of the first issues struck after his accession in A.D. 81. Other denarii and gold aurei with only the tripod and dolphin attributes are common among the coins of A.D. 81–82. The dolphin derives its significance from a story related in Homeric Hymn 3, To Apollo, where an invented etymology has the god assume the form of a dolphin so as bring to shore near Delphi the Cretan sailors who became his first clerics. 1023

Fire: Suetonius, Domitian 5; Cassius Dio 66.24.1–2; Aurelius Victor, Epitome de Caesaribus 10.12. Plague: Suetonius, Titus 8.3; Cassius Dio 66.23.5. 1024

SIG3 817. The accompanying titles of Titus actually refine the date for the erection of this honourific decree for a Pythian victor to sometime after 23rd June of that year. That Titus would have been chosen archon for the calendar year, while Vespasian still reigned, is suggestive of Flavian family interest in Delphi.

FD III.2, p. 67.

1025

Graindor (1931a), 139–147, makes a good case for personal sponsorship by Augustus of the Dodekaïs to replace the defunct Pythaïs.

De curiositate 522D–E (Q. Iunius Arulenus Rusticus, cos. A.D. 92, executed soon afterwards, Suetonius, Domitian 10.3); Theseus 1 (Sosius Senecio); De defectu oraculorum 409E (Terentius Priscus, Stein [1934], 667–668).

1021

1026

1020

BM Coins, Rom. Emp. II, p. lxxv, pl. 59.1-20, 60.1.

151

Flacelière (1962), 3–5. K. Ziegler (1951), cols. 657–659.

Chapter V

architrave of the Parthenon;1032 and the Domitianic period likewise saw the placement of a dedicatory text by its builder upon the architrave of Temple E at Corinth.1033 We have, furthermore, the word of Suetonius that Domitian saw to it that his own name was prominently visible on any building he had restored, often at the expense of the original builder's name.1034 But when it comes to positioning this inscription upon the Delphi temple, there exists little direct evidence for how it would have been fitted into the pre-existing architecture. The interaxial spacing between the centre columns of the temple's east side is 4.128m, which is too narrow for the extant length of the inscription (4.75m). Although the original bottom edge is nowhere preserved, the inscription's extant height of 0.65m is considerably less than the 1.167m of the epistyle course or the 1.405m of the triglyphand-metope course.1035 Furthermore, the lack of clamp cuttings on the backs or sides of any of inscription's constituent blocks and their irregular thickness of 0.12–0.15m leave only the possibility that the inscription blocks might have rested upon the ledge along the top of the epistyle blocks (0.13m deep) and were bonded to the triglyph-and-metope frieze behind by means of some adhesive.1036 In his publication of the temple architecture, François Courby noticed that a thick layer of plaster had been applied to the front faces of the architrave blocks at a late point in the structure's history, which is suggestive but not particularly informative.1037

sympathetic, whether by natural inclination or recent circumstances.1027 Restoration at Delphi in the 80s A.C. Domitian was both benefactor and administrator to Delphi. His first attested dealing with Delphi was the reconstruction, at his own expense, of the Apollo temple sometime between 6th January and 13th September, A.D. 84.1028 The inscription to commemorate this is the grandest in all of Delphi, as well as one of the few Latin texts to be found there. It measures approximately 4.75m by 0.65m when whole and reads, in beautiful capitals:1029: Imp. [C]aesar Di[vi Ves]pasiani f. [D]omitianus Aug. [Germ]anic[u]s p[ont. max]im. tr[ib. po]test. III p.p. imp. VII cos. X des. [XI] tem[plu]m Apo[llinis] sua im[p]ensa refecit. The inscription is not monolithic but cut into several blocks taken from older monuments. One of the blocks bears on its back face portions of three texts of the mid 3rd to mid 2nd c. B.C. and likely came from the dismantled Knidian Treasury.1030 The placing of Domitian's great inscription is problematic. The large number of small fragments into which the inscription was broken suggests a fall from a considerable height onto the Late Antique paving of the temple terrace. The traditionally accepted notion is that Domitian's inscription was prominently situated over the east entrance of the Apollo temple. Indeed, most of the twenty-three marble fragments belonging to this inscription were discovered in front of the east facade of the temple in the 1894 season.1031 A similar sort of immodest behaviour is attested by the dedicatory inscription for Nero set in bronze letters into the east

The location favoured by Courby himself for the great Domitianic inscription was the retaining wall (ischegaon) of Roman construction that ran along the north edge of the temple terrace.1038 He believed that the matrix of this wall, rubble set in concrete, was

1032 For the definitive study, see Carroll (1982); cf. Dow (1972), 13–21. An incomplete text appears as IG II2 3277. The three-line inscription was executed in letters of bronze set into the architrave in the intervals between votive shields set there previously in some uncertain context. The inscription dates to A.D. 61/2 (Carroll [1982], 27–28) and runs thus:

1027

The dossier of letters between Delphi and the imperial administration in A.D. 90 (SIG3 821B–E, see below) resulted from an initial embassy by the Delphians to the emperor.

ÔH≥ ªejx ∆Aºr≥eivou Pavgou boulh; kai; hJ boulh; tw'ªnº v. C— kai; oJ dh'mo" oJ ∆Aqhnaivwn Aujtokravtor≥ªaº mevgiston Nevrwna Kaivsara Klauvdion Sebasto;n G≥ªermºa≥niko;n qeou' uiJo;n strathgou'nto~ ejpi; tou;" oJplivta~ to; o[gdoon tou' ªkºai; ejpimelhtou' kai; nomoqevtou T≥ªi Klºa≥udivou Nouivou tou' Filivnou ejpi; iJereiva~ Paulleivnh~ th~ Kapivtwno~ qugatrov~.

1028

The extent of Domitian's work on the temple is discussed in Chapter III, pages 92ff.

1029 FD III.4.120 (=SIG3 821A =ILS 8905); cf. Jannoray (1944-45), 84–85. The letters in the first line are all 157mm tall (except the first, which is 186mm); and those in the succeeding lines are 110mm tall.

This inscription differs from the Delphi text in a few obvious instances but furnishes an instructive comparandum for the Domitianic document set upon the Apollo temple.

1030

The three texts include two proxeny inscriptions, FD III.4.121 (208/7 or 207/6 B.C.) and FD III.4.122 (ca 257/6 B.C. or later), and a manumission document, FD III.4.123 (158/7 B.C.?). See Courby (1927), 219 for the Knidian Treasury as a possible provenience. The structure traditionally identified with the Knidian treasury is #219, which is situated on the south side of the Sacred Way and opposite the bouleuterion. But one should be cautious about assigning these superstructure blocks of island marble to a building of which only a few foundations survive (Bommelaer [1991], 141–143).

1033

Kent (1966), 134, #333: "...quidam.e]T.LIBERI.EIVS.S.P.[f.c.]" The marble temple is assigned to the Domitianic period on architectural grounds. 1034

Suetonius, Domitian 5, cf. 13.2.

1035

Intercolumniation: Courby (1927), 14. Architrave: Lacoste (1920), pl.5.

1031

FD III.4.120, p.197. In the initial publication of this inscription, Homolle (1896), 716 notes that the fragments were, "...Retrouvés en divers temps en diverses parties du sanctuaire, mais recueillis en grande majorité devant la façade Est du temple."

152

1036

Lacoste (1920), pl.5.

1037

Courby (1927), 90.

1038

Courby (1927), 219.

Chapter V better suited to secure attachment of the Domitian inscription's different blocks than the temple architrave. However, there remains the objection that most of the inscription fragments were found to the east, but not to the north, of the temple. Moreover, the inscription's sheer size and intented impact would have been wasted on anyone arriving at the temple terrace by the Sacred Way, owing to the obscuring clutter of grandiose votive monuments already in place immediately to the northeast of the temple.1039 The solution that would best fit all the facts is a placement on the floor of the temple's east pediment, in front of the pedimental sculpture that was still in place in the 2nd c. A.C.1040

clear assertion of Roman rule over Macedon at the very door to Apollo's temple. The Emperor's Monument adopted the same form as the Hellenistic column monuments clustered around the temple, which is to say a tall and elaborately decorated base for an equestrian statue in bronze. This monument would have been an ideal location for the Domitianic inscription, but the latter was much too long (4.75m) to fit. Domitian might have justified the erection of a grand monument to himself in front of the Apollo temple by the inscription of his own benefaction upon the temple just behind it. In this way, piety could be comfortably accommodated with self-promotion in a manner as traditional and appropriate to Delphi as the nearby column monuments of the Hellenistic kings.

There is no doubt that Domitian's presence on the temple terrace must have been palpable. Besides the great inscription that loomed over its eastern end, there were a newly erected column monument (#421 on the actual state plan of the École Française) and the ischegaon (#527 on the actual state plan) with its statue niche (#528 on the actual state plan).1041 The first of these structures, the so-called Emperor's Monument, stood against the Apollo temple's east facade, a short distance south of its north-east corner and across from the Aemilius Paullus Monument (#418 on the actual state plan) that also stood in front of the temple's east facade. The Aemilius Paullus Monument of course commemorated the Roman general's victory over king Perseus of Macedon in the battle of Pydna (168 B.C.) and was itself to have been a monument to Perseus that the victorious Aemilius Paullus subsequently appropriated and completed.1042 Symbolically, the Aemilius Paullus Monument was a

The column monument erected by Domitian was very similar to its Hellenistic neighbours with a footprint of approximately 3.10m (north-south) by 2.35m (eastwest) and a height of roughly 8m.1043 The Emperor's Monument was once attributed to Augustus, but this hypothesis has been discredited.1044 Moreover, the Domitianic date of the oldest of its secondary inscriptions suggests that the work was his.1045 Although this monument was too small to accommodate the great Domitianic inscription, it is worth asking whether the well-known dossier of inscriptions pertaining to this emperor's intervention in the Pythian Games of A.D. 90 may have been inscribed into its pedestal.1046 Although identifiable blocks from this monument were few, Courby noticed that they came in two different scales and that each size had its own series of alphabetic setting marks. There were only three blocks of the larger size, all of them orthostates; and the existence of inscriptions running from one block to another was proof that they preserved two edges and one face of the monument (2.20m).1047 Since the

1039

Along the north side of the temple terrace were the following monuments, from west to east: the bronze Palm Tree of the Eurymedon (#420, Pausanias 10.15.4–5; cf. Plutarch, Nikias 13, Quaestiones convivales 724B, De Pythiae oraculis 397F); the Pillar of Prusias of Bithynia (#524, currently re-erected); the colossal bronze statue of Apollo Sitalkas (probably #521; Pausanias 10.15.1–2); the great tripods of Gelon and Hieron of Syracuse (#518; Bakchylides 3.5.15–17; scholiast on Pindar, Pythian 1.155; Diodoros 11.26.7; Plutarch, De Pythiae oraculis 397E; Athenaios 6.231E); and, against the north side of the temple's east facade, the Domitianic ‘Emperor's Monument’ (#421, see next page). Pausanias also noted a number of other dedications on the temple terrace that have left no archaeological trace (10.14.4–17.1, 18.1–19.2).

1043

Courby (1927), 277–281, fig. 223. A schematic reconstruction of the monument from the available blocks, which all bear alphabetic series of setting marks, indicates an orthostate pedestal one course high supporting a slightly narrower shaft of alternating string and orthostate courses, eight in all, that terminated in an Ionic crown (FD III.4, fasc. 2, 195, fig. 1). A hypothetical stepped base has been supplied beneath the pedestal; and at least four sets of moulded marble cornices decorated the major transitions of the limestone monument. But Courby's reconstruction has since been modified somewhat (Jacquemin and Laroche [1986], 788):

1040

I owe this solution to a suggestion by Dr. T.L. Shear Jr. The temple's pedimental figures were installed, according to the building accounts, in 327/6 B.C. (École Française [1991], 77–84) and survived into the 2nd c. A.C., as proved by some local coins (Hadrian Types 7 and 20, Faustina I Type 9) and the testimony of Pausanias 10.19.4. The composition of life-size figures was static and rather uninspired —an enthroned Apollo with standing figures of Artemis, Leto, and the Muses to his left and right— and thus would not have suffered unduly from the placement before it of the several thin and rather short blocks that comprised the Domitianic inscription.

Sur le socle tel que le restituait F. Courby, il convient de superposer une assise basse faisant office de plinthe dont aucun élément n'a encore été retrouvé, une assise de mouloure dont trois fragments ont été identifiés et une assise d'orthostates dont le bloc inv. 3781 est le seul connu; le fût se compose ensuite d'assises basses et hautes en alternance. La dédicace pouvait se trouver sur l'assise d'orthostates à la base du fût.

1041

Structure #421 on the French archaeologists' plans is sometimes called the Pilier des Nicopolitains in the older bibliography owing to the citizenship of many of those mentioned in the thirty-four secondary inscriptions carved upon it.

1044

Jacquemin and Laroche (1986), 785.

1045

FD III.4.87–119.

1046

SIG3 821B–E.

1047

Courby (1927), 279, fig. 223: Delphi Museum 1282+1408+1220.

1042

Polybios 30.10.1–2. Livy 45.25.7. Plutarch, Aemilius Paullus 28.4.

153

Chapter V

better to display these imperial texts more prominently than upon that emperor's own monument, right by the entrance to Apollo's temple?1054

modulus of these blocks was wider, yet shorter, than that of other blocks attributable to the same monument, he concluded that the former belonged to a wider pedestal (socle) one course high for a narrower column shaft (fût) above. The preserved dimension of the pedestal was increased to 2.45m by the addition of a projecting base moulding, of which two fragments had been recovered, and further increased to 3.10m by supplying a hypothetical, stepped base below the pedestal. The existence of such a stepped base below the pedestal is suggested by analogy with the other column monuments of Hellenistic monarchs on the temple terrace, but the lack of consistent pattern in their execution means that it need not have been so wide as to increase the length of that face to as much as 3.10m.1048 The actual state plan shows a set of blocks up against the north part of the temple's east facade that might have supported a rectangular column 2.90m (north–south) by 2.15m (east–west).1049 More recent examination of the scanty architectural fragments has led researchers to conclude that the moulding that Courby had restored on paper to below his pedestal actually belonged between it and the shaft above, but his reconstruction has otherwise stood the test of time well.1050

On the other hand, not one of the four different styles of marble cornice assigned to the Emperor's Monument has the same profile as the moulding surmounting the inscriptions in question. And although the heights of the three limestone blocks (0.854m) and the marble mouldings (0.304m) that Courby assigned to the pedestal were very close to the heights for the blocks inscribed with the dossier of A.D. 90, the other dimensions were less close.1055 To accommodate these blocks into the Emperor's Monument would also mean either having to suppose that the pedestal was much larger than the cuttings by the temple's north-east corner allow, or positing a second course of pedestal blocks. But the run of inscriptions from one block to another shows that the dossier blocks could extend as much as 2.90m without turning a corner.1056 Each limestone block from the Emperor's Monument may also be identified by an alphabetic setting mark on its back face, but no such marks appear on the extant fragments of the dossier. The configuration of the blocks making up the shaft (fût), and thus the size of the shaft, is known from an independent series of alphabetic setting marks (A–W ) to have been eight rows of alternating orthostate courses (four blocks apiece) and string courses (two blocks apiece). Since the size of the shaft is known from a few surviving blocks and the setting marks, it is very unlikely that each course of the pedestal had any more than four blocks; otherwise, the pedestal would be disproportionately large for the shaft. So far, Courby's reconstruction of the Emperor's Monument is basically sound.

The imperial correspondence of A.D. 90 would seem on first consideration to be a fine candidate for publication on this monument. These letters, as well as two Hadrianic letters from the same context,1051 all have the same curious composition of a moulded marble cornice 0.295m high bearing the inscriptions' first lines atop a limestone orthostate 0.835m high, onto which the inscriptions continue down.1052 Furthermore, it is certain from more thorough studies of the stones that this marble cornice was not introduced by the Domitianic restorers into the cella wall of the temple, since the temple's limestone orthostates are of a different modulus.1053 And where

1048

See Bommelaer (1991), 168, fig. 70 for comparative elevations of the Hellenistic column monuments.

1049

Hansen and Algreen-Ussing (1975), plan 12. Courby (1927), 280, fig. 225.

1050

Jacquemin and Laroche (1986), 788 (see note 1043 above).

1051

One of the Hadrianic documents (Delphi Museum 2292) is the preamble of a letter addressed by Hadrian to the Delphians in A.D. 118 (Jannoray [1944–1945], 83; Bourguet [1905], 78) and bears on another face three proxeny inscriptions of the 4th–3rd c. B.C. to show that it to was a spolium. The second Hadrianic document concerns the division of Delphi's chora by the emperor's corrector some time after A.D. 127 (Jannoray [1944–1945], 76–77). Although the actual text remains unpublished, Claude Vatin (1970a), 259–263 has written an exposition of its contents.

inscriptions of A.D. 90 from his volume on the inscriptions on the temple's walls. 1054

One of the documents, SIG3 821B, is a decree of the Delphians specifying that the letters of the emperor and his governor be inscribed upon a tablet "...ejn to;n ejpisamovtaton tovpon [sic]."

1052 For a study of these cornices, actually recut Hellenistic kioniskoi, see Jannoray (1944–45), 75–93. Their arrangement of fascia–torus–fascia is admittedly quite different from the pieces of marble cornice attributed to the Emperor's Monument, but of the latter there exist only a couple of fragments.

1055

The pedestal orthostates of the emperor's monument had lengths of either 1.30–40m (depending on whether they belonged to a short side or a long side) and a thickness of 0.35–45m (Courby [1927], 279, fig. 223). But the individual blocks of the dossier had three standard lengths of 0.78m, 0.82m, and 0.89m (as well as two pieces with irregular lengths of 0.98m and 1.26m) and thicknesses varying between 0.20m and 27m (Jannoray [1944–1945], pl. VII–VIII).

1053

The idea was advanced by Jean Bourguet (1905), 65 and later refuted by Jannoray (1944–1945), 84–85. André Plassart, the editor of FD III.4, fasc, 3, supported Jannoray's attribution by omitting the

1056

154

Jannoray (1944–1945), pl.VIII.

Chapter V

required in A.D. 84?1065 One must not assume that the works budget of the Amphiktyony was especially large, or that whatever donations private individuals cared to make were particularly lavish.1066 These must have amounted to no more than an ounce of prevention, when what was required at Delphi in A.D. 84 was a pound of cure. Courby's 1947 excavations as far down as the foundations of the retaining wall along the temple terrace's north edge showed that the vertical transition from the original, 4th c. B.C. masonry to the Roman masonry continued as far down as the ischegaon's lowest level. In fact, a single block of the 4th c. B.C. wall was found lying in an irregular position underneath the rubble and concrete of the Roman repair, still in the spot where it had come to rest after the shock that had burst the wall. The cause was a landslide, concludes Pouilloux in the final publication of this area's topography.1067 Landslides caused by water action and earth tremors were always a risk at steep Delphi. Risk from the former could be, and frequently was, minimized by regulated drainage, but for the latter there was no safeguard. It is impossible to say if the landslide itself caused some of the temple damage that Domitian repaired; but if it did not, it was surely the earthquake precipitating the landslide that imperilled the temple. As it happens, a strong earthquake did strike Corinth in A.D. 77.1068

There was further construction work nearby that received attention at about this time: just to the east of the Roman ischegaon, on the west side of structure #526, some late masonry marks a possible site for the famous Kassotis fountain, which may have been the k r h v n h that was rebuilt or repaired during the chairmanship of T. Flavius Megaleinos (ca A.D. 90).1064 The importance of repairs to retaining walls and water regulators just uphill of the temple is obvious at a site as sloping and unstable as Delphi. Since any repairs to the temple would have been in vain had a landslide from an upper terrace occurred, it is reasonable to suppose that all these works were part of a single programme of renovation and consolidation at the Delphic sanctuary. Furthermore, it can be argued that the emperor's patronage was a response to a single, recent calamity rather than to the gradual deterioration of long neglect. The Amphiktyony had use of the "revenues of the god" (provsodoi tou' qeou') for building projects, as attested already by inscriptions of the mid 1st c. A.C., so why then was the intervention of the emperor's own money

emperor referred to is Titus, the word Oujespasianºo;n would easily fit the lacuna in line 3 too; but in that case the omission of Sebasto;n would be problematic for a reigning emperor (123).

There is also some evidence for an earthquake at Delphi that struck shortly after A.D. 79 and toppled the triangular Pillar of the Messenians (#348 on the actual state plan) that had stood at the southeast corner of the temple terrace since the 5th c. B.C.1069 In his publication of the inscriptions from the faces of this monument, Georges Colin notes that the last two were

2. An unpublished inscription (Delphi Museum 3992) on a base for a statue of Domitian, erected by the priest(s) of Apollo. Although Domitian's name is absent from the fragment, his identity is clinched by the mention of both the title Pater Patriae and a twelfth consulship: he was the only emperor ever to both distinctions simultaneously, which he did in A.D. 86. The less likely candidates are: 3. An unpublished inscription (Delphi Museum 6196) on a statue base erected by the Amphiktyonic council: surviving traces simply name the unknown emperor as a benefactor, which could be an allusion to Domitian's restoration of the Apollo temple in A.D. 84. 4. An unpublished inscription (Delphi Museum 285) on a slab of white limestone that includes the word despovthn, which is of course the translation of the title dominus that Domitian is reputed to have favoured (but see B.W. Jones [1992], 107–109). 1064

1065 See page 145 above for repairs undertaken by the epimeletes Kleomachos in Nero's day. 1066

It will be recalled that it took several decades for the Amphiktyony to raise sufficient funds for the completion of the Apollo temple at Delphi after its destruction in 373/2 B.C., a time when the sanctuary was more nearly at its acme of popularity and prosperity.

3

Pouilloux and Roux (1963), 100–101, citing SIG 813C (Delphi Museum 3959): ∆Apov l lwni Puqiv wi oJ aj r ciereu; " tw' n Sebastw' n kai; ej p imelhth; " tw' n ∆Amfiktuov nwn v. T Flauiv o " Megalei' n o" 5 th; n krhv n hn kai; to; n uJ d ragwv g ion kai; ou; " toiv c ou" ej k tw' n tou' qeou' prosov d wn.

1067

Pouilloux (1960), 89-90.

1068

In June of A.D. 77, Corinth was devastated by an earthquake and subsequently received much help in rebuilding from Vespasian: Plutarch, De anima, frag. VII, #11 [Dübner, V, page 12]; Suetonius, Vespasian 17; Eusebius, Chronicorum canonum ; Orosius 7.9.11; and Malalas, Chronographia X, p. 261 [Bonn]. Some inscriptions in Latin have been recovered from Corinth that record thanksgivings to the Flavian emperors for their aid in the reconstruction of various public buildings (West [1931], #20, 84–86). At about this time, Corinth changed its name briefly to Colonia Iulia Flavia Augusta Corinthus, a name which appears, after a Vespasianic hiatus, on civic coins of Corinth produced under Domitian. Private individuals, such as P. Licinius Iuventianus Priscus, an archhiereus (IG IV2 203), also made good some of the earthquake damage (cf. Kent [1966], #333–334).

Megaleinos was at this time chairman of the Amphiktyonic League, an office one held for four years, from one Pythiad to the next, from A.D. 87–91 in his case. The period of tenure is manifest from SIG3 821D, one of a dossier of letters dating to A.D. 90 that concerns the Pythian Games and mentions Megaleinos as epimeletes of the League. More recently, Bommelaer (1991), 187 and 205 has argued that the topography, the remains, and the evidence of Pausanias 10.24.7 all do permit the location of the Kassotis fountain immediately above the east end of the temple terrace, but that it was probably farther uphill at the east side of the theatre. There is in any case no proof that the krhvnh referred to in the inscription is the Kassotis; nor is its findspot below the 4th c. A.C. Thermes de l'Est outside the east peribolos wall of any use (Pouilloux and Roux [1963], 101).

1069

Bommelaer (1991), 233–234. For an architectural study, see Jacquemin and Laroche (1982), 192–204. For its inscriptions see FD III.4.1–35.

156

Chapter V

point in the late 1st c. A.C.1073 Soklaros also oversaw the addition of an uncertain structure called a strouktwvrion to the gymnasium area and, somewhere at Delphi, the construction of a house for the Pythian priestess.1074 These labours were undertaken in the course of his four-year term as epimeletes of the Amphiktyony. The three inscriptions recording these projects are very similar to one another in many respects and all commemorate projects undertaken simultaneously and, in the estimation of Homolle, shortly after Domitian's work on the temple:1075 "Ces constructions suivirent de près les restaurations du temple; elles forment comme une suite de cette pieuse entreprise." The career of T. Flavius Soklaros and his family is known from inscriptions and the works of Plutarch. Soon after his term as epimeletes, Soklaros held the annual archonship at Delphi in A.D. 98/9;1076 and his family continued to occupy positions of influence there into a third generation.1077 What is

both written in precisely the year A.D. 79 and recalls a hypothesis advanced by Homolle in 1897:1070 Il es fort possible, comme le suppose M. Homolle ...que le monument ait été détruit peu de temps après; car les restaurations faites à Delphes sous le règne de Domitien paraissent avoir répondu à un tremblement de terre important. En tout cas, il ne devait plus exister au temps de Plutarque et de Pausanias. Regardless of motivation, Domitian presided over more than just repairs to the Apollo temple. Epigraphic evidence records other building projects at about this time that might be connected with imperial interest in the sanctuary. The works undertaken by the epimeletes of the Amphiktyony, T. Flavius Megaleinos, in the vicinity of the temple ca A.D. 90 have already been mentioned.1071 One inscription found in the gymnasium records that T. Flavius Soklaros, a friend of Plutarch,1072 built a library (bublioqhvkh), which might have been an annex to the gymnasium, at some

1073

Homolle (1896), 720. The text is carved upon a fragment of what is possibly part of a marble column drum from the Alkmeonid Apollo temple (Delphi Museum 2296): to; koivnon tw'n ∆Amfiktuovnwn ejk tw'n tou' qeou' crhmavtwn uJpo; th;n Flaouivou Swklavrou ejpimelhteivan th;n bublioqhvkhn kateskeuasen.

1070

FD III.4, fasc. 1, p. 28. The emperor Titus is eponymous archon at Delphi in the two latest inscriptions. The allusion to Theodore Homolle (1897c), 620 reads:

1074

Homolle (1899b), 573-574 believes that the mysterious word strouktwvrion refers to a retaining wall for one of the gymnasium terraces, but Puech (1981), 189 translates it as a dining room (Delphi Museum 4088):

De la dispersion des fragments on peut aussi conclure que la basse a été rompue violemment et projetée en sens divers par une secousse terrible, par un tremlement de terre. Tandis que le bas naturellement, et le haut restaient sur place, les assises intermédiaires étaient lancées au loin en éclatant. L'inscription en l'honneur de Turranius permet de conjecturer quand le désastre se produisit. Elle fut gravée en effet quand la base était encore débout, on peut l'induire des deux faits suivants: la dimension des lettres faites pour être lues de loin, la place occupée par les décrets sur l'assise immédiatement supérieure à la plus haute qui eût recu des inscriptions avant notre ère. La précaution eût été inutile et la coïncidence ne se serait pas produite sur un morceau tombé à terre et reémployé au hasard. Le monument existait donc encore sous le règne de Titus; il avait disparu quand Pausanias visita Delphes. C'est après 79 et avant 160 qui tomba. Si l'on se rappelle que Plutarque mentionne un tremblement de terre destructeur à Delphes, que les travaux de réfection du temple datent du règne de Domitien, on sera conduit à placer le tremblement de terre aux environs de 80, et l'on modifiera en ce point l'histoire du temple, où j'avais par excès de prudence peut-être fait l'économie d'un tremblement de terre. 1071

5

to; koivnon tw'n ∆Amfiktuovnwn ejk tw'n tou' qeou' crhmavtwn uJpo; th;n Flaouivou Swklavroªuº ejpimelhteivan to; strouktwvrion ejpoikodomhvsen.

House for the Pythia: Homolle (1896), 721 (Delphi Museum 3341): to; koivnon tw'n ∆Amfiktuovnwn ªejk tw'n tou'º qeou' crhmavtwn uJpo; th;n Flaouivªou Sºwklavrou ejpimelhteivan th;n oijkivan th'/ Puqiva/ kateskeuvasen. 1075

Homolle (1896), 721. Homolle was as yet unaware of the strouktwvrion inscription (Delphi Museum 4088, discovered on 9th June, 1898) that still resided in the walls of a modern church standing over the gymnasium's palaistra when the excavations began. 1076

Soklaros is generally judged to have held the post of archon at Delphi before, or at the same time as, his chairmanship of the Amphiktyony, but not afterwards. However, it is more reasonable (on the basis of the scarce evidence available) that he was first epimeletes. In order to hold that position he need only have been a citizen of a town in a region that sent a delegate to the League's meetings (in his case, a Tithorean representing Phokis). But it was later, as a result of the construction work he oversaw in his term as chairman, that he was granted Delphic citizenship and thereby became eligible to hold the archonship. The grant of Delphic citizenship to former epimeletai is attested in other instances (Pouilloux [1980a], 290). It remains only to decide whether his fouryear chairmanship fell before or after Megaleinos's (A.D. 87–91). A term of A.D. 91–95 is more in keeping with an archonship some three years later.

See note 1064 on page 156.

1072

Puech (1981), 186–189. T. Flavius Soklaros is also known from an inscription of A.D. 98 found at his hometown of Tithorea that honours Nerva. (IG IX.1.200); and his sons, Aristion and T. Flavius Agias, and his grandson, T. Flavius Pollianus, were also noted there (IG IX.1.190, 192, and 193 respectively). Another Soklaros who is attested as archon at Delphi in ca A.D. 150 (SIG3 868C) may also be a grandson of T. Flavius Soklaros. But T. Flavius Soklaros should not be confused with another Soklaros, L. Mestrius Soklaros (IG IX.1.61 found at Daulis, A.D. 118) who may be the Soklaros intended in the Quaestiones convivales, as well as in the De sollertia animalium. To confuse matters further, Plutarch's eldest son also bore the name of Soklaros (Quomodo adulescens 1, 15A), but he appears to have died young.

1077

Puech (1981), 186-192 synthesizes the epigraphic and textual evidence for Soklaros and the members of his family who are attested at Delphi and Tithorea throughout the 2nd c. A.C. In the storerooms of the Delphi Museum there may also be seen a limestone statue base with an unpublished inscription in honour of

157

Chapter V

happenings at Delphi in the time of Nero, as discussed above, but one might justly consider that the sustained efflorescence of Delphi commenced at the time of Domitian.1080

surprising is that all of Soklaros's projects, as well as those of Megaleinos were funded from the prov s odoi tou' qeou', even though the expenditure involved cannot have been negligible. The previous mention of that fund dates to the time of Nero's visit to Delphi. Nero's gift of 100,000 denarii to the sanctuary on that occasion would make it hardly surprising if Domitian also made a donation to Apollo's treasury for the repair and embellishment of the sanctuary above and beyond his repair of the temple.1078

Plutarch and the Domitianic revival The bulk of our evidence for the celebrated revival at Roman Delphi comes from Plutarch's three Pythian dialogues. Plutarch of Chaironeia may be considered a reliable witness for Delphic affairs on account of the life-long relationship between himself and the sanctuary, where he eventually served as one of the two priests of Apollo in the final decades of his life. His connection with the sanctuary has long been appreciated, but the three dialogues have never to my knowledge been put in their true, Domitianic context. Instead, these works have often been thought to praise Hadrian's munificence and were consequently assigned a place in Plutarch's last years. But this is unlikely on two counts. In the first place, different biographical studies have suggested that Plutarch was dead, or at least literarily inactive, very soon after Hadrian's accession in A.D. 117, which would leave insufficient time for the composition of these three works. Secondly, discussion of the Pythian dialogues' date, and even of the longevity of Plutarch's career, has been conditioned by the a priori assumption that Hadrian the noted philhellene was the architect of Delphi's revival.1081 It is undeniable that Hadrian did much for Delphi, but Domitian's contribution was equally significant. If Domitian's role at Delphi is acknowledged, it then becomes likely on the basis of internal evidence and what we know of Plutarch's career that the three Pythian dialogues were all written ca A.D. 90–95, at a time after his return to Greece from Rome and, probably, after his assumption of a priesthood of Apollo at Delphi. Plutarch's enthusiasm for Delphi manifested itself in literary productions intended to better acquaint their readership with the place of Pythian Apollo in the contemporary world.1082

In dealings such as these, the Amphiktyonic epimeletai were the intermediaries of imperial benefaction and administration, as is attested in one of the letters in the dossier dealing with Domitian's intervention of A.D. 90 in the management of the Pythian Games.1079 The anthupatos of Achaea mentions that he will forward on a copy of the emperor's instructions to the Amphiktyons and their chairman Megaleinos; and whereas the latter document is addressed in its preamble to the entire congress of the Amphiktyons, it is clear from the body of the text that a single individual (sou —the epimeletes) is responsible for the execution of the emperor's commands. We know nothing for certain about how the epimeletes w a s appointed, but the facts that this office did not exist until Augustus reorganized the Amphiktyony, and that the first five epimeletai on record all came from the Augustan colony of Nikopolis both suggest that the emperor was involved in the process. These men might reasonably be of great standing, proven loyalty, and healthy ambition within their communities and, as such, came to the notice of an emperor or his agents. This certainly seems to have been the case for T. Flavius Soklaros whose name demonstrates his Roman citizenship at the instance of a Flavian emperor, and whose record attests his influence in central Greece in the late 1st c. A.C. It is also in the time of Domitian that the volume of documentation from Delphi increases to a level as high as any in the succeeding centuries of the Roman Empire. The epigraphic record deals with the day-today business of the sanctuary and town of Delphi: manumissions, honours paid to local magistrates, the reigning emperor, distinguished foreigners, and Pythian victors. The increased epigraphic representation at this time of the last two categories in particular reflected in some measure the heightened fortunes of the sanctuary and its rites. One may suppose that a small measure of imperial patronage went a long way in terms of bolstering the sanctuary's prosperity and perceived importance. The documentary record is suggestive of a buzz of new activity that continued for a hundred years without interruption. This impression is misleading if one considers the

Internal evidence does not allow a close dating of any of the three Pythian dialogues, nor can their relative sequence be postulated with any certainty; over the years, almost every possible combination has appeared in print and has been rebutted. A unity of theme and an overlap of interlocutors suggest that the trio did not diverge widely in date of composition, though even this cannot be proved. But such indications as do exist point to a composition in the later years of Domitian. One must first consider the persons named in these dialogues, whether they were contemporary with the 1080

Champion (1995) and C.P. Jones (1966b) have both argued against Hadrian's role in the efflorescence described by Plutarch, which is contrary to the thesis of Flacelière (1971) and other articles of his.

an eponymous grandson of T. Flavius Soklaros (Delphi Museum 3749). 1078

Cassius Dio 62.14.2.

1079

SIG3 821D–E.

Flacelière (1962), 7.

1081

1082

158

Brenk (1977), 255.

Chapter V composition or lived somewhat earlier, though still in the lifetime of Plutarch. What complicates this determination is that two of the dialogues are set, for dramatic reasons, and no doubt in imitation of Platonic models, somewhat earlier than the actual date of composition. The dramatic dates can usually be ascertained; but Plutarch leaves it intentionally vague how much time has elapsed between then and the present time of his composition. Chronological clues discovered in these works therefore obligate one first to decide whether or not they are anachronisms let slip by Plutarch; but even authentic period details are still useful as termini post quem for the date of composition.

The dialogue proper is introduced by Basilokles and Philinos.1086 Basilokles is not otherwise known;1087 but Philinos participated in several of the Quaestiones convivales of Trajanic date and was one of Plutarch's many friends.1088 That he accompanied Plutarch on a voyage to Rome suggests that he was more than a slight acquaintance;1089 and his erection of a herm at Chaironeia that honours Plutarch as his euergetes would indicate that he was the younger of the two.1090 The smallness of his part in the main account of the De Pythiae oraculis (402E–403A) may also show a lack of age and experience relative to some of the other interlocutors; moreover, the retelling of a dialogue by one young disciple to another is a device well known from Plato (e.g. when Apollodoros regales an anonymous friend with Aristodemos's account of the S y m p o s i o n ). At one point in the Quaestiones convivales, an interlocutor even compares Philinos's Achilles to Plutarch's Cheiron.1091 Just before this point, Philinos is mentioned as having arrived at Phokian Hyampolis with some of his little children (paivdia). The fact that the Quaestiones convivales were written between A.D. 99 and 116 and that Philinos still had pre-pubescent children would both indicate that he was indeed somewhat younger than Plutarch and not likely beyond his forties at the time.1092 Fortunately, Philinos came from a prominent Boiotian family at Thespiai and is attested in inscriptions found there.1093 The work of C.P. Jones on the inscriptions at Thespiai that document him and his family does indeed indicate that he was a little younger than Plutarch and quite likely a kinsman of Plutarch's wife, Timoxena, perhaps even Plutarch's brother-inlaw.1094 Philinos was consequently born in ca A.D. 60, which would have made him Plutarch's junior by ten or

The De E apud Delphos is, as Plutarch writes in his introduction to the dialogue proper, his recollection of a debate that he and others entered upon at Delphi at the time that Nero was abroad in Greece and on his way to compete in the Pythian Games of A.D. 67; and it was in part as spectators that Plutarch and his teacher Ammonios had come thither from Athens.1083 The dialogue De defectu oraculorum is also set in the context of philosophers gathered for the Pythian Games at Delphi, this time in A.D. 83 when Kallistratos was eponymous archon there.1084 On the other hand, the third dialogue, the most important of the three for its concluding evocation of renascent Delphi, the De Pythiae oraculis, does not purport to have a dramatic date: any indications of chronology here may thus fairly be taken as indicative of its date of composition. Unfortunately, such internal indicators of chronology are tenuous; and reference to other works of Plutarch is required to make a persuasive case. In the De Pythiae oraculis the following individuals are mentioned.1085

1086

Schröder (1990), 107.

1087

Schröder (1990), 107.

1088

C.P. Jones (1966b) gathers all the internal evidence for many of Plutarch's dialogues and lives. The Quaestiones convivales were written between A.D. 98 and 116 on secure grounds (72–73). Philinos appears again as an interlocutor in the following dialogues, Quaestiones convivales 1.6, 2.4, 4.1, 5.10, and 3.7.

1083

385B: " ...ajnemnhvsqhn a} pavlai pote; kaq jo}n kairo;n ejpedhvmei Nevrwn hjkouvsamen ∆Ammwnivou kaiv tinwn a[llwn diexiovntwn...." 1084

410A: "ojlivgon de; pro; Puqivwn tw'n ejpi; Kallistravtou kaq jhJma'"...." A number of Kallistratoi are attested as archons in 1st c. A.C. Delphi. In this case, A.D. 83/4 is the date frequently suggested (e.g. del Re [1934], 10). Ogilvie (1967), 108–119 also suggests a dramatic date of A.D. 83 for the De defectu oraculorum, though he considers A.D. 79 and 87 to be outside possibilities. Later in the same dialogue is related the nasty episode of the Pythia who died recently when Nikandros was prophetes (438A-C: "...w{sper i[smen ejpi; th'" e[nagco" ajpoqanouvsh" Puqiva","). Since the role of prophetes was undertaken by one of the two priests of Apollo, this gives a terminus post quem for the De defectu oraculorum of Priesthood XXIX, XXXII? (both ca A.D. 47–66), or XXXIII (about the time of Nero's visit, or shortly afterwards, but probably before A.D. 80) (Daux [1943], 84-88). Furthermore, it seems likely that this Nikandros is likely identical with the priest of Apollo of that name who appears in De E apud Delphos 386B, of which the dramatic date is known to be 67 A.D. (385B); but Jannoray (1945), 74–77 harbours doubts about this identification of Nikandros. Although much depends upon what precise value one assigns to e[nagco", a dramatic date of 83/4 A.D. for the De defectu oraculorum still seems most likely.

1089

Quaestiones covivales 8.7, 727B.

1090

SIG3 843B; the assigned date of ca A.D. 126 is to be understood as indicating a time shortly after Plutarch's death but ought to be moved up to ca A.D. 120, since C.P. Jones (1966b) has shown quite rightly that Plutarch did not live long past the accession of Hadrian. 1091

4.1, 660E. One also learns from this passage that Philinos was a vegetarian, and, on the evidence of Quaestiones convivales 8.7, 727B, a Pythagorean also. 1092

C.P. Jones (1966b), 72–73.

1093

C.P. Jones (1970), 233–236.

1094

Jones (1970), 232 hints at a marriage between Plutarch and the Thespian family: Other evidence, too slight to build on, is worth registering in connection with Plutarch's relations with this generation of the family. The second name of Flavia Archela, Timoxena, is also that of Plutarch's wife; and it is curious that Plutarch was particularly well informed about the rites of Grieving Demeter, Dhmhvthr ∆Aceva, of which Archela

1085

This catalogue makes extensive use of the excellent commentary on this dialogue by Stephan Schröder (1990).

159

Chapter V

fire of Rome in A.D. 80, the Thespians might yet have hoped to reacquire it, but thereafter there was no reason for some generous citizen not to replace it. An opportunity for such a demonstration would have arisen in the mid 80s A.C., when other imperial efforts to rebuild earthquake damage to the province of Achaea could have inspired men like Philinos to render similar benefits on their own account. We know from Pausanias that Menodoros of Athens executed the Eros, which Philinos had commissioned for Thespiai, in the style of the lost statue by Praxiteles.1099 The other work undertaken by Philinos at his own expense as an offering to the god, the doors and their frames (qurwv m ata) in the temple p r o n a i o n, are more suggestive of necessary renovation, possibly after a period of neglect, which is certainly the sort of work that the final clause of the inscription indicates, though with monies other than his own.

fifteen years. He held his first major office, agonothetes of the Erotideia games of Thespiai, in the 80s A.C., which was prior to Domitian's grant of Roman citizenship to him and his family sometime between A.D. 85 and 90.1095 There is a short inscription that is worth quoting in full for another clue that it furnishes:1096 Filei'no" Movndwno~ kai; ∆Arcevla~ uiJo;~ ajgwnoqetw'n ajnevqhken to;n “Erwta kai; ta; ejn tw/' pronaivw/ qurwvmata ejk tw'n ijdivwn, to; te iJe5 ªro;ºn ejpeskeuvasen. The presidency of the quadrennial Erotideia games of Thespiai was a traditional obligation of this family's men, but Philinos's term of office was notable for the generosity he personally lavished on the sanctuary of Eros, the venue for that festival.1097 The phrase ajnevqhken to;n “Erwta means that he set up a new cult image in the place of the Eros of Praxiteles, which Nero had been the most recent Roman to remove in A.D. 66–67.1098 Until the statue perished in the great

The dialogue recounted by Philinos occurred when one Diogenianos visited Delphi the previous day and questioned those whom he met there. Plutarch portrays this inquisitive and intelligent visitor as a young man.1100 A Diogenianos of Pergamon is named a few times without comment as an interlocutor in the Quaestiones convivales, but this may well be a different man.1101 The present Diogenianos was perhaps Diogenianos of Kyzikos, an Epicurean philosopher, albeit influenced by the Academic school, from whose polemic against the Stoic Chrysippos Eusebius quotes a fragment on the uselessness of oracles.1102 The floruit of this Diogenianos is unknown, but the earlier 2nd c. A.C. seems most likely. Another possibility is that he was the Diogenianos from Heracleia-ad-Pontum who distinguished himself as a grammarian, geographer, and lexicographer in Hadrian's day.1103 A floruit of ca A.D. 130 would obviously be consistent with student days in about A.D. 90.

was the priestess at Thespiae. [Plutarch's wife: Ziegler (1951), 646. Grieving Demeter: De Iside et Osiride 378E, written ca A.D. 115, Jones (1966b), 73. Flavia Archela priestess: Jones (1970), 229, #11.] There is also an Aristo, a cousin and contemporary of Plutarch's father, who has the same name as a man in this Thespian family in the early first century (above, no. 5 [p.226]). 1095

An inscription (C.P. Jones [1970], 229, #11) that Philinos's father, Flavius Mondon (fl. A.D. 50–90?), erected in honour of his mother, Flavia Archela (fl. 50–90?) obviously postdates their acquisition of Roman citizenship, "...Fairly late in the Flavian era,"; yet the first inscription to honour Philinos (#12) mentions no Roman nomen and must have predated the other one (Jones [1970], 234). Philinos's Romen praenomen and nomen, Titus Flavius, were common to all three Flavian emperors and in themselves of no help in determining the date of his citizenship. 1096 Jones (1970), 233–234, #12 (=IG VII.1830 =Jamot [1902], 302, #23). Jamot ([1902], 315) did not recognize the significance of the phrase ajnevqhken to;n “E⁄rwta when he wrote simply that Philinos, "...Consacra une statue à Éros,"; nor was he able to say if this stone, found built into a church wall, was a base for the Eros statue, in which case the definite article might have referred to the attached statue and not necessarily to the cult image. However, if merely an attached Eros statue were meant, one would expect a demonstrative pronoun, as in another 1st c. A.C. example from Thespiai (Plassart [1926], 404–406, #20):

Pliny, Natural history 36.22: "eiusdem [sc. Praxitelis] est et Cupido obiectus a Cicerone Verri [II Verrine. 4.4, 4.135], ille propter quem Thespiae visebantur, nunc in Octaviae scholis positus." Pausanias 9.27.3–4: Qespieu'si de; u{steron calkou'n eijrgavsato “Erwta Luvsippo~, kai; e[ti provteron touvtou Praxitevlh~ livqou tou' Pentelh'si. kai; o{sa me;n ei\cen ej~ Fruvnhn kai; to; ejpi; Praxitevlei th'~ hunaiko;~ sovfisma [cf. Athenaios 13.591b], eJtevrwqi h[dh moi dedhvlwtai [1.20.1]: prw'ton de; to; a[galma kinh'sai tou' “Erwto~ levgousi Gavion dunasteuvsanta ejn ÔRwvmh/, Klaudivou de; ojpivsw Qespieu'sin ajpopevmyanto~ Nevrwna au\qi~ deuvtera ajnavspaston poih'sai. kai; to;n me;n flo;x aujtovqi dievfqeire: ...to;n de; ejfæ hJmw'n “Erwta ejn Qespiai'~ ejpoivhsen ∆Aqhnai'o~ Mhnovdwro~, to; e[rgon to; Praxitevlou~ mimouvmeno~.

ou|to~ “Erw~ ejdivdaxe povqou~. aujth; favto Kuvpri~: pou' sæ a[ra dh; su;n ejmoi; devrxato Praxitevlhª"… ÔErreniva" Provkla" 1097

C.P. Jones (1970), 226–227 (#5, Tiberian): Ariston, paternal uncle of Philinos; and 229 (#10, Claudian?): Lysandros, maternal grandfather of Philinos.

1098

1099

Strabo 9.2.25, 410:

Pausanias 9.27.4. See note 1098.

1100

394F–395A, "...tevko","; 395E–F: "...w\ pai' ...oJ neaniva" ...w\ pai'."

aiJ de; Qespiai; provteron me;n ejgnwrivzonto dia; to;n “Erwta to; n Praxitev l ou~, o} n e[ g luye me; n ej k ei' n o~, ajnevqhke de; Glukevra hJ eJtaivra Qespieu'sin, ejkei'qen ou\sa to; gevno~, labou'sa dw'ron para; tou' tecnivtou. provteron me;n ou\n ojyovmenoi to;n “Erwtav tine~ ajnevbainon ejpi; th;n Qevspeian, a[llw~ oujk ou\san ajxioqevaton, nuni; de; movnh sunevsthke tw'n Boiwtiakw'n povlewn kai; Tavnagra: tw'n dæ a[llwn ejreivpia kai; ojnovmata levleiptai.

1101

7.7, 710B; 7.8, 711A–B, 711E–712E; 8.1, 717B; 8.2, 718B–C; 8.2, 720A; 8.9, 731B–732B, 733D, 734C. Ziegler (1951), 672–673.

160

1102

Preparation for the Gospel 4.3. Ross (1996), 475.

1103

Smith (1890), 1024.

Chapter V Theon, the chief interlocutor of the De Pythiae oraculis, is also something of a mystery. The name is admittedly a stock one, which has led many to believe that he is no more than a persona for the absent Plutarch in this dialogue, as well as others where Theon appears.1104 However, there is no convincing reason for Plutarch to masquerade behind a cypher in one of the Pythian dialogues.1105 The only Theon attested in Delphic epigraphy of the appropriate period is the son of one Theodotos, a kitharodos from Rhosos on the north Syrian coast. But the Theon of Plutarch's dialogue is a grammarian with unclear Egyptian connections and citizenship in a Phokian polis.1106

to make the transition to Epicurean philosophy from geometry.1109 Sarapion the Athenian poietes is introduced at the same point in the text (396D), though he too reappears in the Trajanic Quaestiones convivales, where he is a victorious choregos hosting the banquet for friends at his home that provides the setting for this dialogue.1110 Fragments of his poetry may survive, and other references to his work in this dialogue suggest a preoccupation with philosophical subjects.1111 L. Cassius Petraios of Hypata, a contemporary with Plutarch who, along with one Polykrates and the interlocutor Theon, had some role in the celebrated efflorescence of Delphi (409C).1112 Petraeus reappears as a host and interlocutor at Quaestiones convivales 5.2, which is set in Delphi at the time of the Pythian Games. He is well attested at Delphi in the early years of the 2nd c. A.C. by a handful of inscriptions that record his chairmanship of the Amphiktyony, his two terms as agonothetes of the Pythian Games, and his position as high-priest of the imperial cult.1113 Although he was epimeletes of the Amphiktyony when Trajan received the title of Dacicus in A.D. 102 and came to hold his priesthood in the same decade, the dates for his presidencies of the Pythian Games are unknown and could extend back into the 90s A.C. To suggest that his public career began under Domitian would indeed be to argue from silence. On the other hand, the inscriptional record is, as preserved, haphazard and makes no mention, for instance, of any Polykrates who would have been his colleague at the time of Delphi's renaissance.

Boëthos was a mathematician, apparently of Plutarch's generation, who is introduced as undergoing a conversion to Epicureanism at the time of the D e Pythiae oraculis, whereas he reappears in the later Quaestiones convivales as a full-fledged Epicurean.1107 Thus the Delphic dialogue is somewhat earlier. However, Quaestiones convivales 8.3 is set several decades earlier, even before the De Pythiae oraculis, since it has the young Boëthos and Plutarch as guests of the their teacher and Athenian hoplite-general (strathgov"), Ammonios.1108 In this early context, Boëthos refers to himself as a young man who has yet

1104

De E apud Delphos 386D. Quaestiones convivales 1.4, 620A (called a eJtai'ro"; cf. De facie in orbe lunae 940A), 621B; 1.9, 626E–627B, 627D; and 4.3, 667A–B. Non posse... 1099E (called a Phokian). De facie in orbe lunae 939C (connected somehow with Egyptian Thebes). De Pythiae oraculis 409C–D (played a role in reviving Delphi). K. Ziegler (1934), cols. 2059–2066. 1105

Although the interlocutors are too shadowy to permit a dating on this basis alone, the controversial passage

Swain (1991), 326–328.

1106

FD III.3.233. His alternate name, T. Flavius Statianus of the tribe Quirina, is proof of Roman citizenship and a standing of some merit at that time; and the inscription records the conferment of new distinctions by the povli" tw'n Delfw'n, namely Delphic citizenship and a typical array of concomitant honours. The precise ordering of rights and privileges varies somewhat from decree to decree, but almost all include the same mentions of Delphic citizenship for one's family and offspring, the right to own real estate at Delphi, the privileges of proedriva and promanteiva, and the status of provxeno" of one's original hometown. The date is secured by the mention of C. Memmius Euthydamos as eponymous archon for the third time in one of the years that Euthydamos was also one of the priests of Pythian Apollo, a year that fell sometime in the last two decades of the 1st c. A.C. (Daux [1943], 91: archonship P6 in Priesthood XXXIV, between the fixed points of A.D. 79 and 98/9). Plutarchean allusions and the dating of the dialogues in which they occur indicate that Euthydamos's colleague, Eukleides, died and was replaced by Plutarch in ca A.D. 90–95, though possibly as early as A.D. 87/8 (Swain [1991], 320–321).

1109

720E-F: Bovhqo~ e[fh nevo~ me;n w]n e[ti kai; sofisteuvwn ajpo; gewmetriv a ~ aij t hv m asi crh' s qai kai; lambav n ein ajnapodeivktou~ uJpoqevsei~, nuni; de; crhvsesqaiv tisi tw'n proapodedeigmevnwn uJpæ ∆Epikouvrou.

1110

Quaestiones convivales 1.10, 628A: reference is made here to the ejpinivkia composed by Sarapion after the success of an earlier effort with a chorus representing tribe Leontis. 1111

Schröder (1990), 137: an Iambic trimeter of one Serapion, quoted by Stobaios 3.10.2 (=TrGF 185 F 1). Another possible fragment is an inscription in hexameter verse found on a monument for one Q. Statius Serapion in the Asklepios sanctuary on the south slope of the Athenian Akropolis (Oliver and Maas [1939], 315–323). See also Flacelière (1951) 325–327. For Sarapion's other interests, see De Pythiae oraculis 396F:

1107

De Pythiae oraculis 396D–E: " ...oi\sqa ga;r to;n a[ndra metatattovmenon h[dh pro;" to;n ∆Epivkouron,"; and 397C: "...uJma'" tou;" tou' ∆Epikouvrou profhvta" —dh'lo" ga;r ei\ kai; aujto;" uJpoferovmeno"...,"; cf. 399E. Quaestiones convivales 5.1, 673C: "...eJstiwmevnwn hJmw'n para; Bohvqw/ tw'/ ∆Epikoureivw./ "

poihvmata ga;r gravfei" toi'" me;n pravgmasi filosovfw" kai; aujsthrw'", dunavmei de; kai; cavriti kai; kataskeuh/' peri; levxin ejoikovta toi'" ÔOmhvrou kai; ÔHsiovdou ma'llon h] toi'" uJpo; th'" Puqiva" ejkferomevnoi". and 402F:

1108

Schröder (1990), 138. The position of Ammonios as strategos indicates a date shortly before ca A.D. 67, the year when he received Roman citizenship from the consul M. Annius Afrinus after his third and last term as strategos (C.P. Jones [1966a], 211). For Ammonios as the teacher of Plutarch in A.D. 67, see De E apud Delphos 385B–386A, 391E–394C.

dia; sou' dæ au\qi" eij" filosofivan poihtikh; kavteisin, o[rqion kai; gennai'on ejgkeleuomevnh toi'" nevoi".

161

1112

K. Ziegler (1951), col. 680. Stein (1937), col. 1179.

1113

Pouilloux (1980a), 290-291: SIG3 825A–C.

Chapter V

Theon continues speaking of how the god might make his presence manifest, taking as an example an old prodigy of copious milk from the flocks and herds of Galaxion in Boiotia (409B). But indications of divine intervention at Delphi are more emphatic still, he concludes (409B–C):

408F–409C may also be indicative of a Domitianic date. This most important piece of textual evidence deserves quotation, for it is part of the celebrated passage commemorating the new efflorescence at Delphi and the Amphiktyonic meeting place near Thermopylai (Pylaia).1114 The interlocutor Theon, whose point of view was no doubt congruent with Plutarch's, begins by describing how the god Apollo's influence has resulted in marvelous manifestations of renewal and prosperity (408F–409A):

hJ m i' n de; lamprov t era kai; kreiv t tona kai; safev s tera shmei' a touv t wn aj n adiv d wsin, w{sper ejx aujcmou' th'~ provsqen ejrhmiva~ kai; peniva~ eujporivan kai; lamprovthta kai; timh;n pepoih-kwv~. kaivtoi filw' me;n ejmauto;n ejfæ oi|~ ejgenovmhn eij~ ta; pravgmata tau'ta provqumo~ kai; crhv s imo~ meta; Polukrav t ou~ kai; Petraivou, filw' de; to;n kaqhgemovna tauvth~ th' ~ politeiv a ~ genov m enon hJ m i' n kai; ta; plei' s ta touv t wn ej k frontiv z onta kai; paraskeuavzonta ã...25...Ã, aj l læ ouj k e[ s tin ªa[ l lw~ o{ t iº thlikauv t hn kai; tosauv t hn metabolh; n ej n oj l iv g w/ crov n w/ genev s qai diæ ajnqrwpivnh~ ejpimeleiva~, mh; qeou' parovnto~ ej n tau' q a kai; sunepi-qeiav z onto~ to; crhsthvrion.

hJ de; th'" Puqiva~ diavlekto~ ...ajnaqhmavtwn de; kai; dwv r wn ej m pev p -lhke barbarikw' n kai; ÔEllhnikw'n to; crhsthvrion, oijkodomh-mavtwn de; ãkai; nu' n katakosmei' à kav l lesi kai; kataskeuai'~ ∆Amfiktuo-nikai'~: oJra'te ãga;rà dhvpouqen aujtoi; polla; me;n ejpektismevna tw'n provteron oujk o[ntwn, polla; dæajneilhmmevna tw'n sugkecu-mevnwn kai; diefqarmevnwn. wJ~ de; toi'~ eujqalevsi tw'n devndrwn e{tera parablastavnei, kai; toi'~ Delfoi'~ hJ Pulaiva sunhba/ ' kai; sunanabov s ketai dia; ta; ~ ejnteu'qen eujporiva~ sch'ma lambavnousa kai; morfh;n kai; kovsmon iJerw'n kai; sunedrivwn kai; uJdavtwn oi|on ejn cilivoi~ e[tesi toi'~ provteron oujk e[laben.

This second piece of text is especially vexed and quite understandably the subject of much scholarly controversy, which I do not intend to recapitulate here, since it describes the agents responsible for Delphi's revival. What requires reiteration is one conclusion of the more recent and exhaustive studies on this passage: there is no good reason to suppose that Theon was merely an invention by Plutarch to voice his own views. Whether this means that the attentive reader should recognize Plutarch as the unnamed kathegemon is a moot point in the scholarship but, I believe, not in fact the case. It is not that Plutarch was especially modest and would not have taken personal credit if the situation warranted it; but if the Domitianic date of this dialogue is accurate, he would not yet have advanced far in the hierarchy of sanctuary administration. If the kathegemon was not he, then who was he? Most scholars have maintained that it was none other than the emperor Hadrian.1116 Although a Hadrianic date has been shown to be very unlikely, if not impossible, many arguments for an imperial personage have remained valid.

As this passage makes clear, two sorts of building activity characterize the present Delphi, namely the construction of new structures that did not previously exist and the repair of structures formerly in ruin. The Amphiktyony also played a role in the process of architectural renewal at Delphi. The unparalleled prosperity of Pylaia (which Georges Daux conclusively showed to have been the sanctuary of Demeter Pylaia, or Anthela, near Thermopylai)1115 is described as a natural consequence of Delphi's own good fortunes. It is hard to imagine that this ancient, but obscure, sanctuary was beautified for its own sake alone; but rather an increase in the fortunes and influence of the Amphiktyonic League in the Roman Imperial period must have been the reason. The Demeter sanctuary was the original meeting place for the Amphiktyony's semiannual meetings, and always remained the venue for Amphiktyonic delegates to meet every spring. But after the First Sacred War, Delphi became venue for the autumn meetings. Thus the Amphiktyony was the common link between Delphi and Thermopylai and may have possessed surplus, discretionary funds with which to endow its original home. Furthermore, for the analogy to be quite accurate if the Thermopylai sanctuary flourished to the extent it did, Delphi too must have received similar benefactions. This is exactly what happened in the reign of Domitian if one considers the repair of the temple, corresponding to Pylaia's iJerw'n, and the other public works projects of A.D. 90 mentioned already.

To his arguments there is another that may be added. If one wishes to resolve the identity of the kathegemon, proper understandings of that term and his politeiv a are required. In general terms, kathegemon means of course ‘leader’, ‘guide’, or ‘pilot’ and overlaps to some extent with the semantic sphere of the Latin word princeps.1117 The title of princeps was of course first assumed by Octavian/Augustus because it had respectable, Republican precedents and emphasized

1114

For a detailed discussion of the text and its interpretation, see Schröder (1990), 435–448.

1116

1115

1117

The kathegemon of Delphi's revival

To take two examples, Sánchez (2001), 449–450 and Flacelière (1962), 7.

Daux (1938), 3–18.

162

LSJ9 852, s.v. "kaqhgemwvn". OLD, 1458, s.v. "princeps".

Chapter V the constitutional basis for his rule.1118 Later emperors naturally styled themselves in this way too, though the term's original meaning became lost by the the end of the 1st c. A.C.1119 But there is a more particular connection between kaqhgemwv n and princeps that Plutarch would have known well. Plutarch admits in his writings that his knowledge of Latin was very imperfect until he set about to study Roman literature late in life. This means that his command of Latin was still rudimentary while he was engaged in philosophic pursuits in Vespasianic Rome; but such a handicap would not have inconvenienced him unduly since all the Romans with whom he had much contact would have been well-educated and passable speakers of Greek. On the other hand, it is a handicap that would have influenced his transmission of Latin ideas or terms, of which princeps was one. Its usual Greek equivalent was hJ g emwv n , which is in many respects identical with kaqhgemwvn.1120 But the fact that Plutarch translated princeps as kaqhgemwvn indicates that he was thinking of the very specific, philosophical meaning of those two words (but one which hJ g emwv n did not possess): thus Plutarch might well have understood princeps in a technical sense, besides more general sense of imperial nomenclature, to denote the leader of a philosophical school, since this was precisely the milieu he was operating in and whose Latin jargon he might learn first.1121 Accordingly, if he translated this specific meaning of princeps as kaqhgemwv n , it is plausible that he would substitute the other meanings of this word with kaqhgemwvn too, at least until his understanding of Latin improved in later years.

Domitian's damnatio memoriae. The official obliteration of Domitian's name from public documents and monuments after his assassination in A.D. 96 is well attested.1122 Plutarch apparently participated in this programme, either by correcting his earlier, published manuscript of the De Pythiae oraculis, or by re-issuing it with the offending name excised. Whatever the details, it is a fact that nowhere in his copious, surviving works does Plutarch mention Domitian by name before his assassination; the few posthumous references are either plainly critical or merely neutral allusions in passing. It is frequently objected that Plutarch was no toady, but he, like Tacitus, may have had to collaborate with Domitian's regime, and even benefit greatly from doing so, to an extent that later proved embarrassing and was suppressed. One might even speculate that it was by Domitian's doing that Plutarch, the able and cooperative noble of Chaironeia, rose to occupy the priesthood of Apollo at Delphi.

But if kaqhgemwvn meant princeps, that is the reigning emperor, then why did Plutarch not name him, especially since he was not averse to doing so in other instances? One must assume that Domitian was named, but that the name has since disappeared in the lacuna of 25 letters that follows the phrase, "to;n kaqhgemovna tauv t h~ th' ~ politeiv a ~ genov m enon hJ m i' n kai; ta; plei'sta touvtwn ejkfrontivzonta kai; paraskeuavzonta ã...25...Ã," in all surviving manuscripts of this dialogue. Such a solution seems implausibly convenient, to be sure, until one considers that the final few pages of De Pythiae oraculis have suffered in the manuscript transmission and contain a number of small l a c u n a e . More cogent, however, is the fact of

Domitian and Delphi in the 90s A.C.

At this point, the definition of tauvth" th'" politeiva" needs to be reconsidered. The word is vague enough to refer to any level of political organization, including the whole Roman Empire.1123 By taking kathegemon in its most usual sense, one might argue that the (to;n) guide or leader par excellence was the emperor, and that his state (politeiva) would most logically be the empire. But in the context of this dialogue, and with the speaker's use of the demonstrative pronoun (tauvth" th'" politeiva"), it is difficult to believe that anything other than Delphi was intended.

Fortunately, Domitian can be shown from a dossier of imperial correspondance to have been the particular kathegemon of Delphi in A.D. 90. These letters discovered a century ago pertain to the correct running of the Pythian Games and were engraved into a series of marble blocks that each included an overhanging cornice along their top edge.1124 Besides this Domitianic dossier there are a few documents concerning matters of imperial intervention in Hadrian's day that are also inscribed upon similar marble blocks with a projecting cornice.1125 The

1122 1118

Tacitus, Annals 1.1; cf. Augustus, Res Gestae 34.

Suetonius, Domitian 23.

1123

LSJ9, 1434, s.v. "politeiva. III.2.": the word could be equivalent to the Latin res publica, in the sense of either a non-autocratic republican government or a free commonwealth. Augustus's fiction that the principate restored the Roman Republic persisted until late antiquity, since the declaration SALVS REIPUBLICAE frequently recurs on coins up to the late 5th c. A.C. In Delphic epigraphy, the term politeiva is equivalent to res publica in at least one instance: FD III.4.37 C, l.23 (the Greek translation of a Roman law, dated by the editor to 101 B.C.).

1119

Compare Tacitus, Annals 1.9 (of Tiberius) with the more exaggerated use by Martial 6.4.1 (of Domitian); "The title princeps in Latin survived the reorganization of Diocletian, though such phrases as gloriosissimus princeps’show that its original significance had been lost," (Balsdon and Griffin [1996], 1247). 1120

LSJ9,763, s.v. "hJgemwvn. II.1.c." ÔHgemwvn appears as a title of Augustus in the Greek translation of Res Gestae 7.9 inscribed at Ankara (Diehl [1918]), as it also does in the fifth Cyrene Edict of Augustus (line 86, Balsdon and Griffin [1996], 1246).

1124

1121

1125

Cicero, De finibus 3.2.5 (of the Stoic Zeno), De divinatione 2.97 (of the Stoic Panaitios), and Brutus 306 (of the Academician Philon). See also the 1st c. B.C. Philodemos,Volumina rhetorica 1.49S, De Ira p.89W; and the emperor Julian, Orations 6.202d

The standard texts are still SIG3 821B–E.

The two Hadrianic texts are discussed by Jannoray (1944–45), 75–76, 83. The first is the text of a decree adopted at Delphi after the arrival there of the consular magistrate, thecorrector (diorqwth;" tw'n ejleuqevrwn dªhvmwnº) Aemilius Iuncus, and concerns the splitting up

163

Chapter V Hadrianic texts are, however, longer than the Domitianic ones and run down beyond the narrow marble blocks onto limestone blocks that must thus have stood below them. On this account, Bourguet, in his initial publication of these documents, believed that this marble cornice was a continuous one that was set into the south wall of the Apollo temple during the Domitianic restoration of A.D. 84.1126 But Jannoray subsequently dismissed this possibility by pointing out that the limestone slabs below were not of the same dimensions as known temple orthostates; nor was the working of the edges the same.1127 Closer examination showed that the marble blocks were in fact reused cippi, one of which still preserved on its back face 4th and 3rd c. B.C. proxeny inscriptions.1128 Since no Roman-period inscriptions appear on the backs of any of the marble or limestone blocks, and since the publication clause of one Domitianic document specifies that it and the others be engraved on a "s≥tavla and ejn to;n ejpisamovta≥t≥o≥ªn⁄ tovponº," Jannoray concluded that the blank surface of blocks must have been set up somewhere on the temple terrace, quite possibly up against the ischegaon.1129 Whatever their location, the letter-size and quality of the Domitianic dossier are clear indication that it was meant to be seen.

Games, and alerts the governor of Macedonia to execute his wishes (SIG3 821C). The combination of his titles (holding tribunician power for the 9th time, acclaimed imperator for the 21st time, and consul for the 15th time) assures a date in A.D. 90 and before September 14th of that year.

First in the traditional ordering of the inscriptions, though not chronologically first, is the publication decree of the Delphians (SIG3 821B) that was inscribed to the far right of the other documents (S I G3 821C–E):1130

The second and third letters are subjoined, one below the other, and also date to A.D. 90: in the upper one (821D), the governor of Macedonia writes to the Delphians to acknowledge the receipt of Domitian's orders, then states his own compliance, and forwards a copy of the instructions to the Amphiktyons, which is appended below (821E):

Aujtokravtwr Kai'sar, qeou' Oujespasiaªnou'º uiJov", ·Dometianov"‚ Sebastovª", Gºe≥rmanikov", ajrciereu;" mevgisto", d≥hmarcikh'" ejxousiva" to; q——,— aujtokravªtwrº to; k––a–, u{pato" to; i–e–, teimhth;~ dia; bªivoºu, path;r patrivdo~, Delfw'n a[rªcouºs≥i kai; th'/ povlei caivrein≥: fuvsei divkaiovn ejstin kai; eujsebev~, th;n proqeªsmivanº tou' Puqikou' ajgw'no~ ajkolouvqw~ to≥i≥'ª~ ∆Aºm≥f≥iktuon≥i≥k≥o≥i'~ novmoi~ fulavªsseºs≥qai, mhdeno;~ mevrou~ tªw'nº ajrcaivwn ejqw'n parenceiroumevnou: o} i{nªa gevnh-º tai ajkolouvqw~ th'/ proa≥i≥r≥ev≥sei mou, e[grayªa ...ca 10–13...ºIEN...ca 5..N≥ ajnqupavtw/. vacat ªpresbeutai;º h\san ∆Epivnei≥k≥ªo~º Eujdwvrou, ÔRouvstiko~ Eujdavmou, o≥u}~ ijd≥iva/ eujdoªkivmouî 27 ...º 5 preºs≥beiva~≥ aj≥xivou~ kreªivnete ...ca ca 19 EI...HL≥... ... e[rrwsqe aj≥ªpo; ...ºRU≥O≥....E≥PH≥.....ªtºou' ej≥pªiºtrovªpouî...º

qeov". tuvcai≥ ajgaqa'i ªe[doxe ta'i povºlei tw'n Delfw'n, ta;" peri; tou' ajgw'no" tou' Puqiªkou' pemfqeivsaº" aujtoi'" ej≥p≥i≥s≥t≥ªoºl≥a;" ejn≥ to;n ejpisamovta≥t≥o≥ªnº ªtovpon tou' iJerou' ejn liqivnanº s≥tavlan ejncaravxai.

ª... ajnquvpato~ ∆Acaii?a~ ...Delfw'n toi'~ a[rºcousi caivrein. tou' kurivou hJmw≥'ªn qeiotavtouºA≥ujtokravtoroª~º ·Dometianou'‚ Kaivsaro~, ªSebaºs≥tou', Germanikou', pronoou'nto~ tou' kata; th;n ajrªcaivan tavxin ajgomevnou Puqikou' ajgwno~ ..., h}n kata; th;ºn≥ iJerwtavthn aujtou' ejpitagh;n e[graya tw'/ tw'ªn ∆Amfiktuovºn≥wn s≥u≥ªnºedªrºivw/, ejpistªolh;ºn diepemyavmhn tw'/ ªejpimºelhth/' aujtw'n Megaleivnw/. i{na mevntoi eijdh'te, o{ti o{ te kuvrio~ ªdiatevtaktai ..., e[pemya to; ajntivgraºf≥on uJmei'n th'~ te toi'~ ∆Amfiktuvosi ejpistol≥ªh'~ kai; tauvth/º t≥h/' ejpis≥to≥l≥h/' uJpevªtaxaº th'~ tou' Megaleivnoªu. vacat º e[rrwssqe. vacat ª... ajnquvpato~ ∆Acaii?a~ ... tw'/ sunedrivw/ tw'nº ∆Amfiktuovnwn caivrein. vacat gravyant≥ªo~ ejmoi; tou'º kurivou hJmw'n kªai; ejpiºf≥anestavtou Aujªtokrºavtoro~ ·Dometianou'‚ Kaivsaro~ Sebastou', Germanikou', i{na 5 fulavsshsqe tou;~ peri; tou' Puqikou' ajgw'no~ ajpo; tou' panto;~ aijw'no~ mevcriº tou' deu'ro gegenhmevnou~ ∆Amfiktuonikou;≥ª~ novmou~, kai;î tau'taº ajnankai'on h≥\ªn gravºy≥ai uJmei'n, i{na kata; tou;ª~

The letters referred to are three in number. The first is Domitian's letter to the Delphians that acknowledges an embassy to himself, opposes all innovations at Delphi, particularly in connection with the Pythian of a chora (probably public land that was split up and given to the citizens to work with usus proprius, rather than just ius colendi) and dates to after Iuncus's consulship in A.D. 127 (PIR I2, 55, #355; also Groag [1939], col.64). The second is a fragmentary letter from Hadrian, dated to A.D. 118, in which the emperor considers some request made by Delphi. 1126

Bourguet (1905), 65. However, a good deal of correspondence to and from emperors was inscribed into the walls of the Apollo temple (for which see FD III.4, fasc.3).

1127

Jannoray (1944–1945), 84–88.

1128

Jannoray (1944–1945), 83, cf. 88–91.

1129

Jannoray (1944–1945), 91–92. See p. 155 above for further arguments that preclude the location of the imperial dossier of A.D. 90 on the Domitianic column monument at the northeast corner of the temple.

1130

Jannoray (1944–1945), 82. At the right edge of the block on which SIG3 821B is carved, the cornice moulding turns a corner.

164

Chapter V aujtºou;~ novmou~, kaqw;~ oJ aujtokravtwr diatevtaktai, oJ ajgw;n a[ghtai. uJpevtaxa de; ª... uJmei'n to; ajntivgrafon th'~ ejpistolh'~, h}nº oJ≥ kuvriov~ moi e[pemyen, i{næ eijdh'te kai; ejx aujtou' ªth;n iJerwtavthn ejpitaghvn, kai; oJ ajgw;n ejfeºx≥h'~≥ (î) kata; tou;~ ajpo; ªtou' panºto;~ aijw'no~ mevcri tou' deu'ro kai; tethrhmevnou~ kai; uJpov sou kekurwmevªnou~ ∆Amfiktuonikou;~ novmou~ a[ghtai ...º fulassomevnou tou' diwrismevnou ejn .... ªe[rrwsqeº.

Delphi for the Pythian Games and control of the territory extending to the Gulf of Corinth. The last document of the imperial dossier is addressed to T. Flavius Megaleinos, the epimeletes of the Amphiktyony and current high priest of the Sebastoiv who, it will be remembered, undertook a number of building projects in the sanctuary at this time.1133 Thus, it is tempting to suppose that he in some way overstepped his authority by tampering with the Pythian Games. Unfortunately, nothing further is known of Megaleinos than what these inscriptions tell us, not even whence he came.1134

The most obvious question to ask of these letters is what exactly Domitian was trying to accomplish by regulating the Pythian Games in this way. It is clear from the emperor's own letter that in A.D. 90 he replied favourably to an embassy from Delphi that, "...Complained of some proposal by the Amphictyonic League to change the procedure at the Pythian Games," and the further correspondence on this matter shows that he had his provincial governor see that his will was obeyed.1131 It was perhaps in the aftermath of this intervention that the Pythian Games acquired briefly the added title of Caesarian (Kaisareiva) found in a single inscription of the later 1st c. A.C.1132 The need for imperial intervention in the Pythian Games is resumed in the context of Hadrian's correspondence with Delphi on the same subject. But at this juncture, the tone of Domitian's letter and his known conservatism in religious matters suffice to demonstrate his wish that the Pythian Games, as an ancient religious institution, were on principle not to be altered (lines 2–3):

As previously noted, T. Flavius Soklaros continued this trend of sanctuary construction whilst he was epimeletes and is better known than Megaleinos. Plutarch mentions that he came from Phokian Tithorea; and one can posit that he was a close contemporary of Megaleinos.1135 The form of his Roman name suggests that Soklaros received this benefit from a Flavian emperor. Although it cannot be proved with certainty, his was likely the epimeleteia that commenced in A.D. 91. The one piece of evidence that helps to fix his career is a decree honouring the provincial governor Caristanius Iulianius with the erection of a bronze statue at Delphi between A.D. 98 and 102, as determined by the titulature of the emperor Trajan.1136 T. Flavius Soklaros is mentioned in the decree as eponymous archon of Delphi (and thus naturally possessed of its citizenship). However, the epigraphic evidence gives one no reason to believe that Soklaros already held Delphic citizenship during his term as epimeletes, which ought therefore to be placed somewhat earlier than the turn of the century. Indeed, it was not unknown for epimeletai to remain involved with the Delphic sanctuary and be awarded citizenship after their term of office. In the standard publication of the three Soklaros inscriptions, Wilhelm Dittenberger opted for an e p i m e l e t e i a concurrent with his archonship, but there is no sound reason to prefer a date in the late 90s A.C. over one a few years earlier.1137

...fuvsei divkaiovn ejstin kai; eujsebev~, th;n proqeªsmivanº tou' Puqikou' ajgw'no~ ajkolouvqw~ to≥i≥'ª~ ∆Aºm≥f≥iktuon≥i≥k≥o≥i'~ novmoi~ fulavªsseºs≥qai, mhdeno;~ mevrou~ tªw'nº ajrcaivwn ejqw'n parenceiroumevnou... The language of his rescript is unfortunately so vague as to leave unclear the precise nature of the complaint brought before him by the Delphic embassy. Indeed, anyone attempting to control or manipulate the games would not be so foolish as to represent his action as anything but traditionally sanctioned in some way. He may have neither understood nor cared about the details. Fortunately, the Hadrianic correspondence is more explicit and criticizes the Amphiktyony for trying to assume the traditional responsibilites of

1133

Pouilloux (1980a), 288–289. See also note 1064 above.

1134

It is unlikely that Megaleinos originated from Delphi, since he is not attested in any of the Delphic magistracies at this time (Pouilloux [1980a], 288 n.34). 1135

1131

Pouilloux (1980a), 289–290. IG IX.1.200 (T. Flavius Soklaros and his daughter erect a statue to Nerva in A.D. 98). Amatorius 749B: "ejn de; Qespivai" eu|re... Swvklaron ejk Tiqovra" h{konta to;n ∆Aristivwno"." Soklaros was one of the interlocutors in the debate at Thespiai on Eros. Jones (1966b), 72 has assigned the Amatorius a terminus post quem date of A.D. 96 (since the Flavian dynasty is said at 771C to be finished). The same Soklaros may recur in the Trajanic Quaestiones convivales (640B, E, 654C, 682A, 694E, 726B) and the De sollertia animalium of uncertain date (perhaps after A.D. 81, Jones [1966], 71).

Millar (1977), 450–451.

1132

Bousquet (1966), 443 presents the most accurate text of this inscription honouring an unknown agonothetes from Thessalian Hypata (cf. the older FD III.1.546). Louis Robert (1969), 49–58 argues that a new set of games called the Kaisareia was added to the Pythian Games, just as happened to the Isthmian Games, the Asklepeian Games of Epidauros, the Lykaian Games of Megalopolis, at the Eleutherian Games of Plataia, and at the local festivals of Akraiphia, Thespiai, and Kaunos in the Roman Imperial period.

1136

FD III.4.47; cf. FD III.3.232. Daux (1943), 91, P10 suggests the Pythian Game year A.D. 98/9 1137

165

SIG3 823, p.516 n.2:

Chapter V

Domitian's Capitoline Games

However, a late Domitianic date for his presidency of the Amphiktyony might be somewhat more consistent in the context of the Soklaros inscriptions' content, what is known about Domitianic building initiatives at Delphi, and Plutarch's mention of new structures springing up.1138 Each of the three surviving documents from the epimeleteia of Soklaros deals with the erection of new, not repaired, structures in the town of Delphi, i.e. outside the sacred temenos. All three are engraved into blocks of stone reused for this purpose. Of these, the most significant is SIG3 823A, which concerns a house for the Pythia. It is inscribed into a fragment of the marble sima of the 4th c. B.C. temple of Apollo and must therefore give some indication of the extent of Domitian's repairs of A.D. 84:1139

Finally, Domitian's enthusiasm for Greek culture, and for Delphi in particular is evidenced by his introduction into Rome in A.D. 86 of the Capitoline Games based on the Pythian Games.1140 The Capitoline Games were the first regularly-heldgames on the Greek model to be held in non-Greek Italy and became second only to the Olympic Games on the itinerary of (the by now seven) Sacred Games.1141 The primary source for Domitian's Capitoline Games is Suetonius's mention of them in a chapter dealing with other of the emperor's grand, public games and spectacles:1142

to; koino;n tw'n ∆Amfiktu≥o≥vn≥w≥n≥ ªejk tw'n tou'º qeou' crhmavtwn uJpo; th;n Flaouivªou Sºw≥klavrou ejpimelhteivan th;n oijkivan th/' Puqiva/ kateskeuvasen.

Instituit et quinquennale certamen Capitolino Iovi triplex, musicum equestre gymnicum, et aliquanto plurium quam nunc est coronatorum. certabant enim et prosa oratione Graece Latineque ac praeter citharoedos chorocitharistae quoque et psilocitharistae, in stadio vero cursu etiam virgines. certamini praesedit crepidatus purpureaque amictus toga Graecanica, capite gestans coronam auream cum effigie Iovis ac Iunonis Minervaeque, adsidentibus Diali sacerdote et collegio Flavialium pari habitu, nisi quod illorum coronis inerat et ipsius imago.

The second construction text from the chairmanship of Soklaros was engraved into a piece of bluish marble that made up part of a massive column drum thought to have come from the Alkmeonid temple of Apollo. It was discovered, however, in the gymnasium, which is likely the location of the new library that it mentions. to; koino;n tw'n ∆Amfituovnwn ejk tw'n tou' qeou' crhmavtwn uJpo; th;n Flaouivou Swklavrou ejpimelhteivan th;n bublioqhvkhn kateskeuvasen.

Although comparisons with the two occasions of the Neronia held in Rome in the 60s A.C. might come first to mind, the Capitoline Games were not modelled directly on them, but rather on a Greek paradigm. Unlike Nero's games, these were quinquennial in the same sense that the Olympic or Pythian Games were

The third text is somewhat different for having been engraved into the face of a much larger limestone block that was also found at the gymnasium. It concerns the construction of an enigmatic strouktorion.

5

to; koino;n tw'n ∆Amfiktuovnwn ejk tw'n tou' qeou' crhmavtwn uJpo; th;n Flaouivou Swklavrou ejpimelhteivan to; strouktwvrion ejpoikodovmhsen.

1140

Wissowa (1899), cols. 1527–1529. Friedländer (1968), 264-265. A.D. 86: Censorinus, De die natali 18.15: "...quorum agonum primus a Domitiano institutus fuit, duodecimo eius et Ser. Cornelii Dolabellae consulatu.." Gsell (1894), 123 believes that the Neronia were the inspiration for the Capitoline Games of Domitian (for which see 122–125); thus also B.W. Jones (1992), 103. Suetonius may well have believed this, if one takes the first words of Domitian 4.4 ("instituit et quinquennale certamen Capitolino Iovi triplex, musicum equestre gymnicum...,") to be a conscious self-echo of the opening words of Nero 12.3 (see below, note 1141).

The nearly identical phrasing of each inscription suggests a chronological proximity within the magistracy of Soklaros; and the same source of funding for all three projects is indication of a windfall for sanctuary finances for the first time since Nero's visit in A.D. 67. It is not possible to prove direct funding of these projects by Domitian, but the great inscription commemorating his repair of the temple strongly suggests this, as do his other interests in Delphi and her games.

1141

Stephen Miller (1991), 160, #145. Kennell (1988), 249. Jeanne and Louis Robert (1954), 113–115. The Neronia introduced by Nero were held only twice, in A.D. 60 and 65 They too were structured on the Greek model, as Suetonius reveals (Nero 12.3): "instituit et quinquennale certamen primus omnium Romae more Graeco triplex, musicum gynmicum equestre, quod appellavit Neronia." Nero deliberately sought to emulate certain particulars of the renowned games of Greece (12.4): "ad athletarum spectaculum invitavit et virgines Vestales, quia Olympiae quoque Cereris sacerdotibus spectare conceditur ." Furthermore, Nero himself played the role of a magnanimous agonothetes (12.3): "...dedicatisque thermis atque gymnasio senatui quoque et equiti oleum praebuit,"; cf. Tacitus, Annals 16.2, 4–5 (Neronia of A.D. 65). For the timing of the second Neronia five years, not four, after the first one, see Griffin (1984), 119 and 161: Nero did not feel so bound by Greek conventions as to imitate them slavishly. For a full description of the festival, with testimonia, see Hartke (1936), 42–48.

Cum epimeleta Petraeus (n.8253) duas Pythiadas sub Traiano (fere a. 103/7 et 107/11), Plutarchus vero polla;" Puqiav d a" sub Traiano et Hadriano munere sint functi, Soclaro I relinquitur Pythias a. 99/103 vel minus apte 95/99. 1138

De Pythiae oraculis 409A.

1139

Homolle (1896), 720 n.1.

1142

166

Domitian 4.4.

Chapter V

c. A.C.1150 But the reason that the Capitoline Games were more properly modelled after the Pythian Games than the Olympic Games has to do with the events most frequently attested in the literary and epigraphic sources.1151 Winners in four events are attested in the years soon after the games' foundation: Collinus1152 and Scaevus Memor1153 in Latin poetry; Palfurius Sura1154 in Latin oratory; T. Flavius Metrobios of Iasos1155 in long-distance running; and, in the pankration, T. Flavius Artemidoros of Adana and Antioch,1156 and T. Flavius Archibios of Alexandria.1157 Notable losers from this early period include P. Annius Florus1158 and Statius1159 in Latin poetry and Q. Sulpicius Maximus1160 in Greek poetry. Besides the perennial attestation of the popular pankration event, the events represented are almost all non-athletic, of the sort that the Pythian Games, not the Olympic Games, exemplified.1161 It is therefore likely

penteteric, i.e. they were celebrated every four years owing to inclusive counting. More importantly, the Capitoline Games were not a vehicle for the aggrandizement of the emperor's ego to the same extent that the Neronia had been: Domitian, did not after all take part in the Capitoline Games. Rather, these games were dedicated in more pious, Greek fashion to a god, in this case Iuppiter Capitolinus, whose temple Domitian had rebuilt in A.D. 82 after its destruction in the fire of A.D. 80.1143 The Capitoline Games were also planned to match the Olympic Games to Zeus with a Roman counterpart for a more modern age.1144 Besides the four-year interval between Capitoline Games reminiscent of the Olympic and Pythian Games, they were also scheduled for June or July of the calendar year that fell between one Olympic Games (e.g. A.D. 85) and the Pythian Games (A.D. 87).1145 This meant that they filled the place in the cycle traditionally occupied by the Nemean Games, which had already become a political pawn by the Hellenistic period.1146 Another Olympic touch was the inclusion by Domitian of a race between unmarried girls in imitation of an event originally sacred to Hera at Olympia.1147 Domitian presided over this great spectacle dressed like an agonothetes in Greek costume, even down to the agonistic crowns that he and the judges wore. Moreover, he inaugurated his games in splendid style by building a new odeum and stadium in the Campus Martius for their accommodation.1148 Suetonius's account and the epigraphic evidence suggest that some of the events originally favoured by Domitian, namely the Latin and Greek oratorical contests, the kithara contests, and the girls' race, were dropped from the programme after A.D. 96; but the events that were retained were the Greek and Latin poetry contests, the singing, aulos, dramatic recitation, (probably) organ playing, chariotracing, boxing, wrestling, pankration, and the heralds' contests.1149 The Capitoline Games found a niche with these events and continued to be celebrated into the 4th

1150

A decree of Diocletian and Maximianus quoted in the Codex Iustinianus (10.53) refers to an athletic certamen sacrum that was still observed at Rome, one with parallels in Greece —thus surely the Capitoline Games. Ausonius, Professors of Burdigalia 5.5 also alludes to them: ...tu paene ab ipsis orsus incunabulis Dei poeta nobilis, sertum coronae praeferens Olympiae puer celebrasti Iovem. 1151

Both Gsell (1894), 123–124 and B.W. Jones (1992), 103–104 list the same competitors. A careful search among the disparate publications of new inscriptions might yield a few more names. 1152

Martial 4.54 (A.D. 86).

1153

Martial 11.9 (A.D. 90 or 94); cf. PIR1 S 188.

1154

Suetonius, Domitian 13.1; cf. PIR1 P 7. Palfurius Sura was the son of a consul and himself an expelled Senator. The theme of the oratorical contest was always the same, an elogium of Iuppiter Capitolinus (Quintillian, Institutes of oratory 3.7.4: "...laudes Capitolini Iovis, perpetua sacri certaminis materia.,"). 1155

Both fragments of the Metrobios inscription are reunited in IIasos 108 (=Moretti [1953], #66). 1156

IGRR 1.445 =IG XIV.746; cf. SEG 14.605 and PIR2 F 221.

1157

IGRR 1.446 =IG XIV.747.

1158

This is the future historian, in A.D. 90 or 94; cf. PIR1 A 650.

1159

Silvae 3.5.31–33, 5.3.231–233.

1143

Suetonius, Domitian 5.1. The space of four years between the rebuilding of the Capitolium and the first Capitoline Games was of course repeated with every cycle of these games, which leads one to suspect that Domitian instituted them as a recurring commemoration of his own piety. Why the interval should have been four years precisely was his desire to match the Olympiad (cf. Gsell [1894], 123 n.5).

1160

The extraordinary grave marker of this eleven year-old boy survives and preserves his forty-three hexameters on the theme of "Zeus reproaches Helios for lending his chariot to Phaëthon" that he entered in the games of A.D. 94, amid a crowded field of fifty-two contestants (IGRR 1.350–352 =IG XIV.2012). The parents' preamble runs thus: deis manibus sacrum. Q. Sulpicio Q.f. Cla. Maximo domo Roma, vix. ann. XI m. V d. XII. hic tertio certaminis lustro inter Graecos poetas duos et L professus favorem, quem ob teneram aetatem excitaverat, 5 in admirationem ingenio suo perduxit et cum honore discessit. versus extemporales eo subiecti sunt, ne parent(es) adfectib. suis indulsisse videant(ur). Q. Sulpicius Eugramus et Licinia Ianuaria parent(es) infelicissim. f. piissim. fec. et sib. p(osterisque)s(uis)

1144

The Capitoline Games were apparently second only to the Olympic Games in importance (e.g. IG XIV.747, from Rome); and Censorinus, De die natali 18.4 seemingly puts the two festivals on par with one another : "...quare agon et in Elide Iovi Olympio et Romae Capitolino quinto quoque anno redeunte celebratur." 1145

B.W. Jones (1992), 103. Herodian 8.8.3: the assassination of the ephemeral co-emperors Balbinus and Pupienus in the summer of A.D. 238 is said to have occured at the time of the Capitoline Games. 1146

Stephen Miller (1990), 57.

1147

Pausanias 6.20.8–9.

1148

Ammianus Marcellinus 16.10.14.

1149

B.W. Jones (1992), 103–104.

1161

The best known of the Capitoline victors in the late 2nd c. A.C. was the pankratiast M. Aurelius Asklepiades, a citizen of Alexandria and various other cities, whose extensive catalogue (IGRR 1.153 =IG XIV.1102) includes two Capitoline victories. Herodian (1.9.2, 8.8.3) testifies to the continued pomp and importance of the Capitoline

167

Chapter V

to the first twelve months of his reign (A.D. 118). Hadrian replies to an embassy, led by G. Iulius Antigenes, which the Delphians had sent to affirm the town's antiquity and its zeal for the new emperor. Hadrian therefore now confirms its ej l euqeriv a , auj t onomiv a , and all the other privileges granted to it heretofore. A number of the missing phrases are formulaic and have been restored by Plassart by the examples of similar letters to other cities. The sole purpose of this epistle was apparently to congratulate Hadrian on his accession and request confirmation of Delphi's privileges.

that Delphi was Domitian's inspiration when he instituted new games at Rome at a time between his repair of the Apollo temple and his involvement in the Pythian Games' administration. Hadrian and Delphi The reattribution to Domitian of an efflorescence once ascribed to Hadrian leads one to ask what the latter, a noted philhellene, actually did do to benefit Delphi. The quantity of epigraphic materials pertaining to Hadrian's involvement with the sanctuary is considerable, even if more tangible traces of his patronage are not. Some of the most remarkable documents to survive from Roman Delphi are copies of an extensive correspondence between Delphi and Hadrian inscribed into the walls of the Apollo temple. Most of the letters are very fragmentary but have been excellently published with extensive commentary in the epigraphic Fouilles de Delphes volume edited by André Plassart.1162 To these documents may be added a few more, published in various places, to supplement the picture of relations between Hadrian and Delphi.1163 Although it would be otiose repeat all the observations of Plassart and the other editors, an overview of all the inscriptions will suggest both the extent and nature of Hadrian's involvement with the sanctuary. The following list summarizes all the known documents in chronological order, inasmuch as this can be ascertained from the more fragmentary inscriptions.

SIG3 829A A statue of Hadrian erected by the Amphiktyons in ca A.D. 118, under the epimeleteia of Plutarch. SIG3 829B A statue of Hadrian erected by the polis of the Delphians in ca A.D. 118. The curious duplication of effort may hint at strains between the Amphiktyony and the citizens of Delphi that later surface in the correspondence of A.D. 125. SIG3 830 A decree of the damiourgoi, passed during one of their regular sessions, in a year when Hadrian was archon of Delphi for the first time (thus ca 118–120). The decree confers Delphic citizenship upon C. Iulius Pudens, the frumentarius of the Legio I Italica, whom Hadrian had assigned to sojourn in Delphi and oversee some unspecified projects that he, the emperor, had organized.1165 The apparent uninvolvement of the Amphiktyony in this project may be significant.

FD III.4.300 A few fragmentary lines of uncertain date that list Hadrian's titles as a preamble to an almost completely lost letter to the Delphians. In the single fragment associated with the body of the letter (6802), the name Melisªs... can be read.1164 It may predate F D III.4.301 (A.D. 118), which is located immediately to its right on the temple wall.

Vatin (1965), 65–73:1166 A letter of late A.D. 118 inscribed onto a marble orthostate that rested atop the white marble moulding of FD III.4.302. The emperor here approves the Delphians' decision to honour a certain Memmius in response to the embassy of C. Iulius Antigenes. Hadrian mentions the antiquity of both the polis of the Delphians and the cult of its patron god. He declares that he has sent a letter to the same effect to the krativ s tw/ aj n qupav t w/ , Claudius Granianus. Vatin believes that this approval of Delphi's actions is proof that Hadrian was by this point eponymous archon, as attested by S I G3 830 above.

FD III.4.301A heavily-restored letter from Hadrian to the polis of the Delphians that dates Games in this epoch. On the other hand, the more highbrow appeal of non-athletic contests is reminiscent of the Delphic tradition. The kitharodic contest in particular was the primordial Delphic event that reputedly predated the institution of the Pythian Games (Strabo 9.3.10, 421; Pausanias 10.7.2; cf. Lucian, Adversus indoctos 8–10). This event still earned its practitioners a good living in the Roman period (Martial 5.56.8–9). In a recently published dossier of inscriptions laying out the details for a new set of games that one C. Iulius Demosthenes of Oinoanda wished to endow at his hometown in A.D. 125, the prize money for kitharodes tops the list at 300 silver denarii (C.P. Jones [1990], 486; Wörrle [1988], 8, lines 38–46). See also Chapter I, pages 33ff. 1162

SIG3 836 A decree of Delphi in honour of one Catillius Macer of Nikaia. It is included here because it opens with the words, "∆ E n

FD III.4.300–308.

1163

The other inscriptions are listed by Flacelière (1971), 168–179, whose sequence is followed below.

1165 Cf. Aurelius Victor, Epitome de Caesaribus 14.5 (Hadrian's registration of architects and engineers into the legions).

1164

Melission was a common name among the governing class of Roman Delphi (Daux [1943], 110, 120). Less likely is Melissos, which was the name of a priest of Apollo (de la Coste-Messelière [1925], 86, #13).

1166

For a summary of this unpublished document, see Flacelière (1971), 170–171.

168

Chapter V Delfoi'" a[rconto" Aujtokravtoro" Kaivsaro" ÔAdrianou' to; bæ ...," which indicate a date of A.D. 125 or 129.1167

be stripped of his victory, and the ajgwvn is to be reckoned null and void (a[kuro", col. II, lines 6–8). But if a constestant justifies his crown (in the same event as one awarded at Pylaia?), on the basis that he had come to Delphi and won it there, in the god's presence, Hadrian bids (keleuvw) the Senate to ratify the following censure of the Thessalians: to render to the god all the crowns, and forfeit to him the 10% deposit placed by those undergoing judgement (col. II, lines 8–11). Plassart is at a loss to explain why the Thessalians were involved in judicial proceedings in the matter of the games, though the answer may have been contained in the missing portions of the first part of the letter.1170 But the mere fact of legal action at least proves the seriousness of the quarrel over control of the Pythian Games. Hadrian issues another command (keleuvw) through the Senate that the Thessalians return to the god the money of the aj g wnoqev t ai, concerning which he himself has learned (from aggrieved Delphians, no doubt) that distributions have been made (col. II, lines 11–14). Before returning to ratify the distribution of Amphiktyonic delegates in lines 16–18, Hadrian issues a final command concerning the games' finances: as much of the god's money as certain individuals have already distributed is to be refunded to the god; and the names of the distributors are to be reported to Hadrian as quickly as possible (col. II, lines 14–16). Evidently, the Delphians had complained to Hadrian of illegal loans that certain Thessalian Amphiktyons had made to private individuals with sanctuary money earmarked for the games.1171

FD III.4.302 A long letter, in two columns, from Hadrian to the polis of the Delphians in A.D. 125, the year of one of his archonships there. It opens with the emperor's announcement of his decisions concerning the Delphians' involvement in the Amphiktyony (...kªoºinwnei'n...) and how the Pythian Games are to be organized (...diºa≥ t iv q esq≥ ª ai...). The two subjects are treated in reverse order. The matter of the games (col. I, lines 7–12, 26–27) is obscure, though it appears that the Delphians were complaining of certain Thessalian infringements. Although the remainder of the first column is extremely fragmentary, one can see that it resumes the matter of Amphiktyonic votes and the Thessalians: allusions are made to Nero's reform of that college and to administration (aj g wnoqºesiv a ) of the games. Lines 1–6 of column II continue the subject in more coherent form with the important notice that some group had journeyed to Rome and proposed to the Senate, according to the requirements of certain nov m oi, its recommendation to cream off the excess votes possessed by the Thessalians and distribute them among the Athenians, Lakedaimonians, and the other poleis, with a view to making the Amphiktyony common to all Hellenes.1168 The novmoi in question would seem, from a later reference in FD III.4.305 (see below), to be some traditional regulations governing the Amphiktyony. The representation of both Delphian and Thessalian points of view supports the notion that this recommendation was made by special commission originally sent from Rome to Delphi (col. II, lines 28–40);1169 and its occurrence in this letter shows both that Hadrian supported the recommendation and that the Senate confirmed it.

In lines 16–18 of column II, Hadrian affirms his perpetual piety towards Pythian Apollo and expresses a personal desire that his newly constituted Amphiktyony be retained in all matters of business, yhfivsmata, dovgmata, and sunbov l aia. At this point, the letter enters its conclusion, because the remaining 22 lines of column II all deal with matters that Hadrian is reserving for future judgement.1172 One may suppose, along with Plassart, that these matters were put before him after the rest of the letter had been drafted, though lines 19–21 are too fragmentary to clarify the transition. The first piece of future business concerns the spending of unspecified xevnia by the Delphians, and whether money for this is to come from the god's funds or from the guests' pavtri" (lines

Hadrian also sponsored other pieces of related business for the ratification of the Senate. Anyone who received a crown at Pylaia, either during a meeting of the Amphiktyony or on any other occasion, he wrote to the Delphians, is to 1167

Flacelière (1971), 171 prefers the former date, Daux (1943), P21 the latter. It was in A.D. 125 that Hadrian, as emperor, first visited Greece and apparently stopped at Delphi. 1168

This text renders seemingly impossible the model of Daux (1975) for the evolution of the Amphiktyony, since there must have been at least one intermediate stage between the Amphiktyony of Augustus and that of Pausanias. See Chapter II, pages 58ff.

1170

Sánchez (2001), 451–453. Plassart (1970), 79.

1171

Sánchez (2001), 447. This sort of corruption appears to have been widespread, for Pliny came across it whilst auditing the records for public expenditures at Prusa (Letters 10.17a–b, cf. 10.54).

1169

Provincial embassies to the Senate, as opposed to the emperor, seem to have been very much on the wane by the mid 2nd c. A.C. (Millar [1977], 343).

1172

Plassart (1970), 80–81. This sense is clear from the future tense of first-person verb forms in lines 24, 28, 41–43, (cf. 37–40).

169

Chapter V

SIG3 835B. Statue of Hadrian erected in A.D. 125 by T. Flavius Aristotimos, the priest of Apollo, at the bidding of both the Amphiktyony and the Delphians. This may be indicative of a rapprochement, or an attempt at one, in the wake of FD III.4.302.

21–24). Hadrian asks that the distributors of monies present at Delphi when he visits and requests that he then be given accounts of the god's revenues and the expenditures to audit (lines 24–28). He also promises to pass judgement on the charges brought by the Thessalians against the Delphians, that the latter are sanctuary-violaters (iJ e rosuv l oi) and absconders of what belongs to the Amphiktyony (lines 28–31). In a rather complicated matter concerning a legal dispute between the Thessalian-dominated Amphiktyony and the Delphians over the port of Itea, Hadrian has asked Claudius Timokrates to comb the Amphiktyonic archives for resolutions that contradict one another and are at odds with common usage. The Thessalians have said that Delphian claims to the port are inappropriate and that, on this account, the Delphians have destroyed the [...]; but the Delphians have been able to prove that they paid thirty talents to Vespasian for control (kuriva) in perpetuity over all the pastures on the coastal plain and the port. Hadrian promises that there will be an ejxevtasi" of the whole affair when he arrives at Delphi (lines 31–40). The final item to be considered is whether the Aitolians deserve Amphiktyonic delegates, and if Augustus did indeed set a precedent for this, as they apparently now claim, by assigning places to the Aitolians in addition to those he gave to the Nikopolitans (lines 40–43).

Vatin (1965), 7–21 :1174 A letter from Hadrian in September, A.D. 125 to both the Amphiktyony and the polis of the Delphians, in response to a previous letter from both parties. Hadrian presented their letter to the Senate at Rome, which applauded the zeal manifested in their decrees and expressed tokens of its very high esteem for the ambassador chosen to present the letter (T. Flavius Aristotimos) by conferring upon him the honours customary for worthy ambassadors. As regards supplementation(?) of the Pythian Games, Hadrian writes, it is wise to preserve them for the edification of posterity, provided that one neither detracts from, nor violates, the traditions of the Pythian Games —for they are the commemoration of fights waged by the god on behalf of liberty— so that they might stand as a reminder of both Apollo's benefactions and Hadrian's utter unwillingness to abolish such a tradition. Hadrian concludes that he will make an explanation during a personal visit to Delphi and thereby demonstrate his concern for the correspondents' goodwill towards himself and their prosperity. The letter is addressed from Hadrian's villa at Tibur.

Although this letter does not explain as much as one would like about the obvious acrimony that existed between the Amphiktyony and Delphi, it is possible to make a few general observations. It is clear from the allegations that each of the two parties was eager to exclude the other from a monopoloy of control over the monies, lands, and prestige of the Delphic sanctuary. But various points of contention were so involved and lacking in obvious solution that Hadrian, the eponymous archon, decided to postpone adjudication until he could visit Delphi in person to review all the evidence and question all the witnesses. His promised ejxevtasi" may be reflected by the contents of two later inscriptions described below, Delphi Museum 347 etc. and Delphi Museum 1144 etc. The publication on the temple wall of this letter addressed to the polis of the Delphians probably indicates that the verdicts reached on the many points of contention were on the whole favourable to the the Delphians, not the Amphiktyony.1173

Plassart explains that the dovgmata alluded to in this text are the joint decree of the Delphians and Amphiktyony to erect a statue of Hadrian in the sanctuary of Athena Pronaia (see SIG3 835B above), which Aristotimos undertook and news of which, as this document shows, he himself then relayed to the emperor.1175 The eagerness of Aristotimos to curry Hadrian's favour is also shown by his sponsorship of an issue of Delphic coins honouring Antinoös.1176 FD III.4.303: Another letter to the polis of the Delphians postdating FD III.4.302. Only a few, tattered fragments of a long epistle survive. This is apparently a rescript dealing in some unknown way with the Amphiktyons (line 5) and money (unplaced line IV) that Hadrian issued in response to an embassy by at least five Delphians, including a son of a Melissos, an Aristainetos, a Philleas, and a Philamon son of Hybrias. 1174

For a summary of this unpublished document, see Flacelière (1971), 172–173. The fragments of this text (Delphi Museum 351+2326) were examined by me.

1173

One might cite in corroboration of this the excellent relations that apparently existed between Delphi and the emperor over the next several years, as indicated by the subsequent texts.

170

1175

Plassart (1970), 83.

1176

See Chapter III, page 55.

Chapter V FD III.4.304: A letter from the Delphians to Hadrian, which also ought to be placed somewhat later than FD III.4.302 (A.D. 125). Although just as fragmentary as FD III.4.303, some of the lacunae in this inscription can be filled more easily. Lines 22–24 make it clear that the Delphians have entrusted a number of unspecified requests for the emperor to their ambassadors, among whom is T. Flavius Aristotimos. About 70% of the letter recalls Hadrian's great services to the sanctuary and town (especially lines 26–27, "...mav l ista ojrqwvsei" hJmw'n, kaªqw;" kai; hu[xhka" h[dºh kai; w[ r qwka", th; n pov l in..."), expresses the Delphians' trust that he will not disappoint them, and even calls him a qeo;" thlikou'ªto"º (lines 12–13).

Delphi Museum 2243+2965+6936 +8130: A n unpublished text, regrettably very fragmentary, that is the conclusion of a letter from Hadrian in response to an embassy led by Antigenes.1180 The mention of some sort of allotment seems consistent with the ejxevtasi" promised in the letter of A.D. 125 (FD III.4.302), so this document may date a little later. The empty margin below the last line of these fragments indicates that the surviving fragments made up the end of a longer inscription, which, as a smooth top edge shows, continued down from a higher block. FD III.4.307: A letter from the Delphians to Hadrian, also mostly in tiny fragments, though a few lines in one column can be restored. The theme is obviously that of effusive thanksgiving to the emperor for his example of leadership and swthriva of Delphi. In two, half-extant lines, it seems clear that Hadrian has just visited Delphi and that the days of his visit will be official holy days (unplaced line VIII).

FD III.4.305: A letter from Hadrian to the Delphians, in direct response to the letter and embassy of FD III.4.304. It is so fragmentary that restorations have only been proposed for lines 30–36. There may be some decision concerning the Pythian Games and Amphiktyonic control over them (lines 30–32, "...ª ...ta; ajrºcai'a movna ejxevstw ª---º toi'" ∆Amfiktuºvosin o{sa oiJ novmoi diagorªeuvousin ajei; diapºr≥avttesqai..."). The lines 32–36 refer to two issues unresolved in FD III.4.302, namely the Delphians' desire to distinguish between praktikav carried out by the Amphiktyony at Delphi and at Pylaia, as well as their complaint over Amphiktyonic dov g mata validated illegally. It is obvious from this sentence that the setting to rights (ej x ev t asi") promised in the inscription of A.D. 125 has yet to happen. As in FD III.4.302, Hadrian here wishes to assert the Amphiktyony's right to operate by its traditional n o v m o i .1177 The praktikav at Delphi and Pylaia were likely identical with what Hadrian says he will allow only if it follows ancient traditions, which is an allusion to the institution of Amphiktyonic contests at Pylaia to rival the original ones at Delphi.1178 This ruling is actually very similar to Domitian's condemnation of unspecified innovations by the Thessalians, but quite at odds with the proliferation of Pythian Games by the end of the 2nd c. A.C.1179

Delphi Museum 347, etc: Twenty inscribed fragments and one piece of anepigraphic cornice containing the rulings of Aemilius Iuncus, a corrector sent by Hadrian to settle affairs for the liberae civitates of Achaea province.1181 The extant portions include thirtytwo lines of text inscribed upon two marble blocks in a fashion similar to the Domitianic dossier of A.D. 90. The top block carries an ornamental cornice and the first six lines of inscription; below it, an undecorated and almost square ‘orthostate’ block bears the rest of the inscription. The actual text remains unpublished, but some of its contents have been discussed in print.1182 The document is an agrarian law dating between A.D. 129 and 132 that specifies in great detail how onetime sanctuary land is to be allotted to interested Delphians, as well as what one may and may not do to the land afterwards. The application and enforcement of these regulations is the responsibility of the annual a r c h o n . The measures prescribed by Hadrian's corrector in this document pertain indirectly to the Amphiktyonic interference of A.D. 125, even though the text makes no mention of any party outside of Delphi.1183 One of the pressing issues

FD III.4.306: Tiny fragments of a letter from Hadrian to the Delphians. No more than disjointed words can be discerned. Most intriguing are mentions of contracts, a bibliofuvlax, and cash.

1180

See Vatin (1965), 65–73; and FD III.4.302.

1181

The exemplary publication and discussion of this important text by Ferrary and Rousset (1998) definitively replaces the earlier accounts of Eck (1974a), col. 2 and Von Rohden (1894), col. 550. 1177

1182

Plassart (1970), 95. See FD III.4.302, col. II, line 1.

1178

Cf. FD III.4.302, lines 6–12; and Plassart (1970), 95.

1179

See Chapter VI.

1183

Jannoray (1944–45), 75–76. Vatin (1970a), 261–263.

The apt parallel for the regulations of Aemilius Iuncus would be the visit of another corrector, Avidius Nigrinus, some fifteen years earlier to solve a boundary dispute between Delphi and her Phokian

171

Chapter V

would have had the authority to impose a solution that the Amphiktyony might not like.

in the letter FD III.4.302 of A.D. 125 had been possession of the sanctuary's resources, in particular its territory. Thus the distribution of land under the auspices of, if not at the instigation of, Aemilius Iuncus is clear proof that at least this issue had been definitively settled by the imperial administrations in the Delphians' favour.

If so, Hadrian's decision merely to reinstate what were perceived as the ancient traditions, and not necessarily to chastise the Amphiktyony, may have been cause for disappointment to the Delphians. But a general unwillingness for sweeping innovations can hardly have come as much of a surprise. A similar example of restoration at a Panhellenic site was Hadrian's reinstatement of a boys' four-stade footrace at the Nemean Games.1185 In any case, it was his habit to involve himself in minutiae of civic administration, particularly if he held the local archonship at the time. Letters and edicts from Hadrian to Athens in ca A.D. 124/5 show that he took similar pains over matters of importance to the local economy, such as the proportion of the local olive harvest that was to remain in Attika, or a warning to retailers not to hold back merchandise from market in times of scarcity.1186 And it was either Hadrian or a subsequent emperor of the 2nd c. A.C. who looked into agonistic matters and made specific regulations about the requirements for eligibility in the games of Athens.1187

FD III.4.308. Letter from the Delphians to Hadrian, A.D. 132 Hadrian is called Olympian, Panhellenian, and Pythian as part of his official titulature (line 2). After the two-line greeting, the Delphians mention a public festival of prayers to Apollo for the emperor, and public demonstrations of gratitude for the graces bestowed from Hadrian's unmistakable godhead (line 4), as well as their delight at his having been initiated at Eleusis (line 5). The festivities at Delphi included the Amphiktyonic council (line 6), which gives one reason to suppose that a rapprochement had been effected between the people of Delphi and that college in the years since A.D. 125. Hadrian was eponymous archon of Delphi at least twice, both times probably in the years prior to his creation of the Panhellenic League centered on Athens in A.D. 132. This office might explain the frequency of letters and embassies exchanged between Delphi and Rome during Hadrian's reign, an intensity of correspondence that was certainly unusual for a site that was not a major city like Athens, Corinth, Ephesos, or Aphrodisias. This is not to say that Hadrian, once petitioned, never took an interest in the civic life of the Empire's minor centres, but the intensity of his attentions towards Delphi, not to mention the level of solicitude it received from other emperors, clearly marked it out as special. However prevalent the practice of naming the reigning emperor as chief magistrate of one's city might have been, it seems that the Delphians did not regard it as merely an empty honour but actually took the opportunity to get good use out of Hadrian.1184 Although much day-today business was surely handled by the local boule, it is surprising to see how many decisions were actually referred to his discretion. It may even have been a premeditated intention of the Delphians to give Hadrian the archonship at a time when they were quarreling with the Amphiktyony since he could be expected to be well-disposed to the Delphians' side and

In this broader context, Hadrian's actions do not indicate a policy in the 120s A.C. to cultivate Delphi as the centre of Panhellenism, an idea that he abandoned with the foundation of the Panhellenic League at Athens.1188 Thus Dietrich Willers has maintained, who describes the institution of this league as, "...An instrument of Hadrian's policy of unification for the Empire," especially through the imperial cult. Hadrian's decision to designate Athens as the cultural centre of the eastern Empire, he argues, was belated and followed upon a failed attempt to give this role to Delphi and a Panhellenic Amphiktyony, although, "The structure of the Amphictyony seems to have been too solidly confirmed to allow for the kind remodelling Hadrian had in mind."1189 Willers does not elaborate on this statement, but it is possible that he had in mind a 1185

Pausanias 6.16.4. The Nemean Games were held in Argos by the Roman Imperial period. In describing the athletic contests put on by the Argives in honour of Nemean Zeus, Pausanias does not indicate that they necessarily took place at the site of Nemea (2.15.3). Indeed, the next sentence begins, "ejntau'qa e[sti...," and recalls the reader's attention from the short digression on the rites in honour of Nemean Zeus so as to resume the story of prince Opheltes's death at Nemea and the sight of his tomb there. Archaeological evidence from the Nemean sanctuary confirms this interpretation of Pausanias (Miller [1990], 44). 1186

IG II2 1100 and 1103, respectively.

1187 IG II2 1106. Mention of the Panhellenia Games instituted by Hadrian in A.D. 131/2 is the only indication of this fragmentary inscription's date. The text is clearly in the form of a letter from the emperor to a synodos (of athletes, I believe) that replies to a letter or embassy from that body. The emperor's thanks for the synod's erection of statues to him is reminiscent of the customary involvement of athletic synodoi in the imperial cult (e.g. IG XIV.747, 1055b, from Neapolis and Rome respectively).

neighbours (FD III.4.290–296). For more on the imperial correctores, see Burton (1996), 402. 1184

Only four emperors troubled to hold the eponymous archonship at Athens: Domitian (IG II2 1996, between A.D. 84/5 and 92/3), Hadrian (before his accession, in A.D. 111/2; IG II2 2024, 2025, and 3286), Commodus (A.D. 188/9; SHA, Gallienus 11.3–5; Oliver [1942], 58–62, #25–26; Raubitschek [1949], 280–283), and Gallienus (A.D. 264/5; SHA, Gallienus 11.3). For a chronological list of office-holders for 2nd and 3rd c. A.C. Athens, see Follet (1976), 507–512.

172

1188

Willers (1989), 9.

1189

Willers (1989), 9.

Chapter V

present the published portion here.1192 The extant text runs in two vertical columns of 25 lines each and extends over three orthostate blocks, of which the central one is preserved here. The break between one slab and another is denoted by the mark, ⁄. A discontinuity of sense between the last line of column I and the first line of column II indicates that the inscription is not preserved to its full height either. However, the end of the letter is preserved at the bottom of column II. Except for the upper, left portions of the first column, most of the text from the left orthostate block is preserved.

suggestive phrase from Hadrian's letter FD III.4.302, in which he voices his desire that some formerly Thessalian places on the Amphiktyonic council be given instead to "...The Athenians, the Lakedaimonians, and the other poleis so that the council may be common to all the Hellenes."1190 If so, this is too slim a thread upon which to hang so weighty a hypothesis, especially if the privileged niche of Delphi in Plutarch's Pythian dialogues is to be dated a generation earlier. The wider context of this quotation within FD III.4.302 shows that Hadrian was more concerned with reversing a Thessalian domination of the Amphiktyony than by re-establishing the Amphiktyony as a Panhellenic League. Chapter II has already drawn some connections between the Amphiktyony of the Roman period and the Panhellenic League with the intention of suggesting that one may have been the inspiration for the other, not that Hadrian's Amphiktyony was a miscalculation that he later set right at Athens. Although Delphi was worthy of imperial sponsorship, it was never intended to assume the role of Athens as the cultural capital of the Greek East.

Column I ªAujtokravtwr Kai'sar, qeou' ÔAdriano⁄u' uiJo;", qeou' Traianou' Paºrqikou' uiJw'no", qeou' ªNerouva e[kgono", T. Ai[lio" ÔAdriano;⁄" ∆ Antwnei'no" Sebasºto;", ∆Arc≥iereu;" Mevgisto"≥, ªdhmarcikh'" ejxousiva" to; -, u{pat⁄o" to; -, aujtokravtwr to; -, Pºavthr Pavtrido", tw'/ koivªnw/ tw'n ∆Amfiktuovnwn ⁄ kai; Delfw'n th/' povlei, caivrein. vacat tw/' nºovmw tw' puqik≥w≥' 5 ª.................⁄....... ..... ............... ºejnªavrºcwn kai; ª...................⁄......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . eijselºastikw'n toi≥'" ª.................⁄........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ajpºo≥crw'nta ei\nai ª.................⁄........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o}ºn≥ ejk≥avlei no ªmon puqikovn? . . . . . . ⁄ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º mh'den ej≥n≥twn 10 ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . kºai; ejcrh'n ªuJºma'" tau'ta ª..................⁄.......... . . tw/' puqºiv≥w to;n palaio;n fulacqh' ªnai ajgw'na? . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º presbeiva" ajpesteivla ªsqe? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º e[qno" kai; dh'loi ejste; .omi ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . . . . . . . ºqai toªuvtºwn ajfhrhvmenon dia; . a 15 ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . . . . . . . º . uJmeter≥a'≥ª" bºoulh'" eij mh; tauvta≥n≥ ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . . . . . . . º eij sumfevªrºont≥o" e[doxe moi dei'n ª..................⁄...........º ou[te th;n panhvgurin uJm≥ei'n h] ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . . ºesqai kai; tou' mh; sfªovºd≥r≥a≥ ejn ojclhqh ªnai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . ajgºwnismavtwn a{dh peri≥s≥poudastav ejstin 20 ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º ⁄ e[cesqai moi dokei'te tau'ta ejglexavmeno" ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄uJºpokritw'n ajgw'na kai; kwmwdiva" uJpokriv ªsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . º"≥ e[pou" uJmnhvsousin de; ou|toi tw' aujtw' ªnovmw/ . . . . . . . . . . . . º ⁄ kai; to;n qeo;n pavterav

Antoninus Pius and Delphi Antoninus Pius continued Hadrian's tradition of personal involvement in the affairs of Delphi through assumption of the archonship, probably in the first years of his reign.1191 Unlike his predecessor, Antoninus never visited the sanctuary, but he nonetheless took an active interest in the administration of the Pythian Games. There survives less than half the text of a long letter, apparently addressed to both the Amphiktyony and the people of Delphi, in which Antoninus issues specific instructions for the conduct of the upcoming games as a tribute to the deified Hadrian (column I, l. 23). Strangely enough, the letter was not re-edited and published anew by André Plassart in his excellent collection of the imperial letters inscribed upon the Apollo temple, even though the dimensions and marble of the Antonine inscription would suggest that it appeared on a temple orthostate. Since the only publication of this letter, and a partial one at that, is to be found in a rare book a century old, it therefore seems appropriate to

1190

Col. II, lines 1–6: ªKaºq≥æ a} mevntoi crh; poiei'n kata; tou;ª"º novmou", ªeijºsªhvnegkanº gn≥wvmhn eij" th;n lamprotavthn sªuvgºklhton eijshghªsavmeºno≥i ta;" yhvfou" a}" plevona" tw'ªnº a[llwn e[cousin Qesªsaºlªoi; ∆Aºqhnaivoi" kai; Lakedaimonivoªiº" dianemhqh'nai kai; tai'ª"º 5 a[lªlaiº" povlesin, i{≥na hj'/ koino;n pavntªwºn tw'n ÔEllhvnwn to; sunevdrªiºon.

1192

Delphi Museum 3722+1083(? —also referred to as 1088 and 1058— a small fragment adjoining the right edge of the much larger 3722). Bourguet (1905), 88–89 (column I only).

1191

SIG3 848. Dittenberger, the editor, felt that this archonship ought to be dated between A.D. 139 and 142.

173

Chapter V mou a≥ujth; ga;r hJ uJpov ªkrisi" . . . . . . . . . . . . . ⁄ . . . . ºovntw" ajneivhke carismevnh kai; uJmei'n

Gallienus at Delphi The last emperor known to have visited Delphi before the 4th c. A.C. was the cultured P. Licinius Egnatius Gallienus, probably in A.D. 264/5, the same year in which he held office as eponymous archon at Athens and became an initiate of the Eleusinian mysteries.1197 His sojourn at Athens was the principal stop on a tour that also included Megara, Delphi, and probably Corinth.1198 However, Gallienus's further interest in Delphi is manifested by three fragments of an unpublished letter of his to the sanctuary, which was probably written at about the same time. The fragments are slight and do not reveal much, though it seems probable that he wrote either to ratify old privileges or to extend new ones to the polis of the Delphians.1199 One of the surviving fragments preserves an allusion to the Pythian Games, and one is tempted to see another instance of imperial concern for this venerable institution.1200 The identical size and style of lettering on all three fragments shows that they belonged to the same document, but a recutting of their edges in a secondary reuse makes it impossible to determine their original positions relative to one another.

Less than half the text of the unpublished second column (ll. 25–47 of the whole text) is extant, but it is clear from what survives that the upcoming Pythian festival is the subject of the emperor's instruction to Delphi for the remainder of the letter. Particular mention is made of poetic and musical contests and of a "most-godlike Caesar",1193 so there seems no doubt that the deified Hadrian was to be honoured at Delphi at the festival. A Roman-style date on the final line of the inscription's second column indicates that the letter was written between mid-September and midOctober,1194 but not enough of Antoninus's titulature survives to indicate the actual year, except that the title Pater Patriae precludes A.D. 138, the first year of his reign. One may, on the analogy of the Hadrianic correspondence, match the occasion for this letter with the archonship of Antoninus at Delphi and a desire to follow the example of his predecessor and adoptive father. The instructions for a tribute to the deceased and deified Hadrian continue the vein of filial piety that one would expect from Antoninus in the early years of his reign, when a lack of enthusiasm for the late emperor may yet have lingered in some quarters.1195 Antoninus's gesture would have been more to the point earlier in his reign than later, and the festival of A.D. 139 suggests itself as an opportunity.

Although Gallienus was not the final emperor to visit Delphi, which continued to draw imperial visits for another century, he was apparently one of the last to take an active interest in the site.1201 Julian II (A.D. 360–363) would have been another, but the famous anecdote of an inquiry that he had a friend pose of the Pythian oracle cannot be considered reliable.1202 No

By formalizing this and similar gestures of reverence for Hadrian throughout the Empire, Antoninus shrewdly strengthened his own position as dynastic successor. Yet one may fairly suppose that it would not have been difficult to convince Delphi to mount a suitable show of gratitude, either in this instance or several others, for it stood to benefit from almost every wind of political vicissitude that might blow at Rome. Delphi's culture and tradition stood for something that imperial ideology was happy to promote. Most of the few dozen emperors in existence prior to the 4th c. A.C. are not known to have patronized Delphi, and they may well have ignored it completely, but hardly a one of them ever chastised it.1196

1197

Follet (1976), 141–143. SHA, Gallienus 11.3: Cum tamen sibi milites dignum principem quaererent, Gallienus apud Athenas archon erat, id est summus magistratus, vanitate illa qua et civis adscribi desiderabat et sacris omnibus interesse, quod neque Hadrianus nisi in summa felicitate neque Antoninus nisi adulta fecerat pace. Areopagitarum praeterea cupiebat ingeri numero contempta prope re publica.

1198

Megara: IG VII.81. Delphi: Bourguet (1905), 92. Corinth: Kent (1966), 53, #117. The imperial name on the base of this last statue was deliberately erased, though traces of the name G≥a≥l≥ªlihno;ºn≥ can be seen in the third line. 1199

See Delphi Museum fragments 2761, line 5 and 6048, lines 5 and 26 for mentions of the polis and its citizens, not of the Amphiktyony.

1193

Lines 29, 32; compare column I, ll. 22–23, where there is mention of individuals who will sing songs of praise and Antoninus's divine father. Lines 36–37, qeiº⁄ovta≥toª"º Kai'sar.

1194

1200

Delphi Museum 6048, line 12.

1201

Vatin (1962), 229–241.

1202

Cf. Athanassiadi (1989), 277. There are two accounts of an oracle delivered to Oribasios, Julian's friend, at Delphi. One is related by Philostorgios, a staunch Christian roughly contemporary with Julian; the other is found among the works of Kedrenos, a Byzantine writer living centuries later, who is the only one of the two to mention that Julian sent Oribasios to Delphi with a view to reviving the oracle. Both sources, however, preserve the same oracular response:

Line 47, ∆O≥ktwbrivwn.

1195

Upon his accession, Antoninus had to reverse the apathy, if not stem the antipathy, of the Senate at the prospect of Hadrian's deification (Birley [1996], 114).

1196

One reads of Nero that he removed five hundred statues from Delphi (Pausanias 10.7.1), but made a gift to the sanctuary of 100,000 denarii, which Galba soon tried to recoup (Cassius Dio 62.14.2). The episodes of Nero's rapacity and generosity may have been connected in some way, but the obfuscation of a hostile tradition makes the truth well nigh impossible to recover (see note 951 above). The only other incident of what could be considered penalization of Delphi was Constantine's removal of more statuary to adorn Constantinople.

Ei[pate tw'/ basilh'i camai; pevse daivdalo" aujlav. oujkevti Foi'bo" e[cei kaluvban, ouj mavntida davfnhn, ouj paga;n lalevousan: ajpevsbeto kai; lavlon u{dwr. Vatin (1962), 235–238 has convincingly argued that the affair, as related by Philostorgios, had nothing to do with Delphi, but was rather a ridicule of Julian's attempts to resuscitate the cult of Apollo

174

Chapter V trace of Julian II has been found among the stones of Delphi and, though this fact means nothing per se, whatever plans he might have formed for the sanctuary likely remained unfulfilled, owing both to the brevity of his reign and the repudiation of his pagan proclivities by his successors. We do know that Julian II supported the Pythian Games, and other Panhellenic festivals, to the extent that he continued uninterrupted the privilege of their host cities from taxation and urged Corinth to foster the old traditions.1203 The paucity of imperial documents later than the 2nd c. A.C. at the sanctuary does not by itself bode well for the influence of Delphi in late antiquity but in fact belies the popularity that new manifestations of the Pythian Games were enjoying abroad. At a point shortly before A.D. 200, the tendency to conserve the games' original state was reversed when a spate of new Pythian Games began to be founded throughout the eastern provinces with imperial sanction. Whereas the level of imperial concern for Delphi's well-being may have crested under Hadrian and his near successors, a fresh shoot from that old stock later flowered abroad for a new purpose. The next chapter will explore the phenomenon of the new Pythian Games and their connection with imperial ideology.

at Daphne, near Antioch. In its larger context, his tale of the unsolicited oracle brought by Oribasios to Julian is a demonstration of the might of Christ over and against a roofless Apollo. The later Kedrenos, however, may have misunderstood Philostorgios, for he went him one better by having Julian despatch Oribasios to Delphi, only to hear by the god's own admission that he was already vanquished. 1203

Julian, Letters 28, 408C, 409C–D. Julian may also have restarted the quadrennial Aktian Games after a possible cessation that occurred in the late 3rd c. A.C. (Sarikakis [1965], 155).

175

Chapter VI

Chapter VI: New Pythian Games

period, later became extremely common under the high Empire, and provided a regular livelihood for a class of itinerant, professional athletes.1206 In addition, privileges of great advantage to both host and competitor were transferred along with the title of "sacred and crown-awarding contests" (iJeroi; kai; stefanivtai agw'ne"); and as a result the licence was not granted prodigally. It is possible that Delphi itself benefited materially from the foundation of new Pythian Games; but the advantages of new games to their hosts is indisputable.1207

Introduction This final chapter of the dissertation leaves Delphi to survey the exportation of the Pythian Games to some of the twenty-seven cities in the Balkans, Asia Minor, and Syria between the reigns of Commodus and Gallienus (A.D. 180–268). Since no notice survives at Delphi for these exports, it is reasonable to ask to what extent the new Pythian Games were connected with their inspiration, both in sanction and in execution. Although the available evidence is spotty, it appears that the new Pythian Games were loosely modelled on the original festival but also enjoyed a considerable latitude in deciding whether or not to adopt all Delphic practices. The festival at Perinthos kept with Delphic use, for instance, and did not award cash prizes, whereas the Pythian Games at Ankyra apparently did award money.1204 The grant of permission to stage new Pythian Games was at the emperor's discretion; and Delphi's legacy became more and more a tool in his hands. The theme of the previous chapter, the interest various emperors had in Delphi, is resumed here to demonstrate the continued importance of the site, through its Pythian festival, to the imperial ideology of the late 2nd and the 3rd c. A.C.

The new Pythian Games described in this chapter were principally a phenomenon of Asia Minor and the Balkans and, as such, are distinguished here from a handful of agonistic festivals with the Pythian name that had appeared in Greece centuries before the Roman Imperial period. The earliest such example is that of Sikyon, where the early 6th c. B.C. tyrant Kleisthenes is said by some sources to have founded Pythian Games.1208 This isolated action clearly falls outside the parameters of a chapter dealing with the actions of Roman emperors, though the case of Kleisthenes is a useful parallelism for possible, later interactions between emperor and Delphi.

Owing to an actual or supposed association with the original Panhellenic circuit of old Greece, all the new Pythian Games were of the highest class of competition called iJ e roi; aj g w' n e" or iJ e roi; kai; stefanivtai agw'ne" and were so named because the prize was a crown of nominal value that one dedicated to the festival's patron deity.1205 There existed a broad division in the agonistic landscape between these competitions and the less-prestigious, smaller-scale qevmide" where only a cash prize (qevma) was awarded. Thematic competitions are attested in the Hellenistic

The reasons for instituting a new set of games may be explained legitimately in several ways. From a practical standpoint, one could argue that gaudy

1206

Inscriptions recording the activities of professional athletes in the Roman period are found in the corpus of almost every site. Two good examples from Delphi are the herald or trumpeter (L.?) Septimius Aurelianos (Robert [1970], 19–27) and the pankratiast wrestler M. Aurelius Demostratos Damas (Daux [1944–45], 125–126, #37; FD III.1.556–557; cf. Robert [1934], 58–61 and [1930], 44–49, two of numerous essays that he devoted to the athletes of this period). Stephen Mitchell (1993), 225 points out that thematic contests for cash prizes were especially prevalent in the mountainous regions of south and southwest Asia Minor, but almost wholly absent from central and northern Anatolia, and that they were usually confined to boxing, wrestling, and pankration events.

1204

For the prizes at Perinthos, see page 200 below. But for Ankyra, see Caracalla's Type 9, where purses are depicted alongside the one crown of a single festival, the Isopythia, page 182. Local issues from a number of other cities use the same iconography as at Ankyra: Pergamon's Valerian Type 1, page 186; Side's Trajan Decius Type 1, 189, or Salonina Type 1, pages and 190; Thessalonike's Gordian III Type 1k, page 191, or Otacilia Severa Type 1f, page 192, or Gallienus Type 1b, page 192; and Lydian Tripolis's Gallienus Type 1, page 194). The incorporation of certain Delphic characteristics was clearly left to the host city's discretion: Thessalonike is known to have constituted its own Amphiktyony in connection with its Pythian Games (see page 198), but Side, for example, did not (see page 210).

1207

For possible benefits to Delphi, see page 210. The heightened status of a Pythian contest not only redounded to the glory of its participants but also to the prestige of its host city. In addition, the city could add more diverse competitions, attract a greater audience, and thereby benefit local business (Mitchell [1993], 218; Harl [1987], 69). Ramsay MacMullen (1981), 25–26 emphasizes the economic opportunities a big religious festival would afford its host through associated retail activity; see, for instance, the economic activity described as part of an Isis festival at Phokian Tithorea by Pausanias (10.32.15).

1205

1208

Mitchell (1993), 218. ∆Agw'ne" eijselastikoiv was another common term for festivals of the highest category. Walter Pleket (1975), 56–71 and (1973) has blurred our perception of the key distinction between a holy and a thematic set of games by showing that cash prizes were in fact offered at a number of iJeroi; kai; stefanivtai agw'ne". But the traditional distinction of purely nominal prizes remained intact at Delphi (see Chapter IV, pages 119 and 131).

See Chapter I, pages 11 and 46. For unnamed contests at Sikyon, see Pindar, Olympian 13.109 and Nemean 9.53. The scholiasts name them Pythian Games and adduce the association with Kleisthenes's exploits in the First Sacred War; but Pindar himself calls the Sikyonian games to Apollo a foundation by Adrastos (Nemean 9.9), a legendary king of Sikyon (Homer, Iliad 2.572). This attribution is striking in light of Herodotos's account that Kleisthenes did everything he could to rid Sikyon of the cult of Adrastos (5.67).

176

Chapter VI festivals were, for the wretched poor, a distraction that conveniently nipped civic unrest in the bud.1209 One could also show that local elites frequently produced new festivals for the civic calendar so as to provide themselves with another means for self-promotion.1210 But what most of the available evidence for new Pythian Games suggests, and what this chapter will show, is that their chief importance lay in their connection with the emperor.

authorization for a promotion in rank, or extra expenditures, for a pre-existing set of games.1216 The personal involvement and approval of the emperor in altering the agonistic status quo of a city was, by the late 2nd c. A.C., not only desirable but also legal necessity.1217 During the 1st c. A.C., the foundation of new agonistic festivals was encouraged in the provincial centres to complement the imperial cult;1218 and Hadrian continued to favour the institution at select cities of mustikoi; aj g w' n e" with non-athletic events only.1219 But by the mid 2nd c. A.C., the often ruinous expenditures on festivals by cities had become a matter of concern to the emperors Antoninus Pius and M. Aurelius, who were consequently reluctant to grant permission for new foundations.1220 Commodus and many of his successors in the succeeding century reverted to a policy of instituting several new iJeroi; kai; stefani'tai agw'ne", though not, as Hadrian had, out of a desire to foster Greek arts and culture:1221

Close relationships between autocrat and popular festival were not new to the Roman Imperial period. Mention has already been made of Hellenistic monarchs who sought Delphi's public acknowledgement of new festivals founded at Pergamon and Alexandria.1211 Octavian's decisive naval victory at Actium in 31 B.C. naturally furnished the occasion for his foundation, or rather refoundation, of the Actian Games in honour of a local aspect of his patron, Apollo, who had presided over the battle from an ancient temple nearby.1212 Three distinguishing characteristics of the games that were founded by Roman emperors, or that drew their attention, were their sheer number, their quadrennial frequency, and their common enhancements of nomenclature to include a form of the emperor's name, such as Sebasteia, Hadrianeia, Antoniniana, Valeriana, etc.1213 A single set of games at any one city might bear different epithets at different times;1214 but the confusion is resolved when one realizes that newer epithets usually replaced older ones, and that their appearance was not arbitrary but in response to an imperial intervention.1215 Such interventions usually took the form of a new foundation or of an emperor's

From now on particular and specific considerations which linked a city to the reigning princeps tended to determine the award of the right to stage new agones... The spread of sacred games, over the century that divides Commodus from Tacitus [emperor in A.D. 275/6], can only be understood against a background of imperial policy, the emperors' own journeys to the eastern war zones, military movements, Roman victories, and, overall with new developments in the imperial cult. Whereas in the second century emperor worship was most frequently expressed through new templebuilding, or by sacrifice and ceremony on significant imperial anniversaries throughout the year, in the third century the emphasis lay on ceremonies such as adventus and profectio,

1209

Velleius Paterculus 2.93.1. Cassius Dio 53.31.2, 54.17.5. Harl (1987), 67. 1210

Harl (1987), 64. Reynolds (1982), #58–62.

1211

See Chapter I, pages 46ff. The inclusion of Pythian Apollo as a frequent reverse type on Seleukid coins may indicate a close and long-term affiliation between that dynasty and Delphi (des Gagniers et al. [1969], 289–312). 1212

1216

Price (1984) 104 n.15. See Pliny, Letters 10.118 for an imperial promotion of a thematic games to sacred status and the subsequent eagerness of victors to secure the concomitant privileges.

Sarikakis (1965), 145–162.

1217

1213

Price (1984), 103–104. One of the few exceptions to the quadrennial frequency was a biennial set of games at Laodicea ad Lycum (IGRR 4.850; cf. the quadrennial IGRR 3.382, 778, 780, and 4.654). A four-year cycle was surely meant to recall the original Olympic and Pythian Games of Greece.

Mitchell (1993), 219–221.

1218

One example, the Balbillhva festival frequently cited in the inscribed catalogues, was founded at Ephesos in honour of the divine Vespasian by his Ephesian astrologer Ti. Claudius Balbillos (Moretti [1953], 184–185).

1214

In the instance of the Pythian Games at Delphi, for instance, one is faced with the epithets of Puvqia Kaisareva, megavla Puvqia, and Puvqikon Puvqia in inscriptions of the Augustan(?, FD III.1.546), Flavian (IG IX.II.44), and Valerianic (ISmyrna 667) periods respectively. But there was never more than one set of Pythian Games at Delphi, so one can only associate the nomenclatures with imperial involvement.

1219

Such festivals are known to have been instituted at Side, Ikonion, Ankyra, and possibly at Pessinos. The endowment by Demosthenes of games at Oinoanda with a large number of artistic competitions in A.D. 125 is a comparable phenomenon (see pages 111 and 132 above). 1220

Symptomatic of this policy is a Senatorial decree of A.D. 177 ratifying a motion of the two emperors M. Aurelius and Commodus to reduce the cost for cities of putting on gladiatorial shows that was published throughout the Empire (Oliver and Palmer [1955]). Cassius Dio was aware of agonistic expenditure as an imperial concern of the past, but retrojected the anxiety to Augustus's day (52.30; Mitchell [1990] 190).

1215

A modern analogy, at least in Canada and Britain, is the frequent inscription on commercial products of the words‘By appointment to Her Majesty, Elizabeth II’ to advertise the fact that this particular brand of, say, tea is the one brand used in the current royal household. But occasionally one finds reference to an earlier monarch and not Elizabeth II, which is to say that the brand in question once did supply Buckingham Palace but has since been passed over in favour of someone else's tea.

1221

Mitchell (1993), 221. For the increasingly-elaborate role of imperial adventus in the 4th c. A.C., see MacCormack (1972).

177

Chapter VI where the emperor himself was present, and on the new agonistic festivals. The new Pythian Games of the mid-Empire were thus part of a much larger phenomenon. but this chapter will limit itself to examining some of the new foundations in order to ascertain what benefit lay in having a festival with the Pythian label, as well as what such a designation might have entailed. The intuitive response that old Greece's Pythian Games were perpetuated in name simply as a result of their traditional position near the top of the agonistic pyramid requires additional nuance. Whereas the simple name undoubtedly had something to do with their propagation, this chapter will examine the numismatic and epigraphic evidence to suggest an ideological basis for the spread of Pythian Games in the 3rd c. A.C. Epigraphic sources for the new Pythian Games The epigraphic evidence for the new Pythian Games founded in the Roman Imperial period is usually tantalizingly incomplete. It often consists of a passing reference to a victory by a celebrated athlete, or a liturgy undertaken by a prominent citizen of the city where the new set of Pythian Games was held. Occasionally the two categories overlap, as when a retired athlete takes charge of a city's athletic guild or the administration of its athletic festivals.1222

1222

See, for instance, the career catalogues of T. Flavius Archibios (IG XIV.747, A.D. 107), and M. Aurelius Asklepiades (IG XIV.1102, ca A.D. 200), both of which are translated by Stephen Miller (1991), 168–169, 171–173. The Delphic corpus attests similar administrative positions for M. Aurelius Demostratos Damas after he retired from athletics in the first half of the 3rd c. A.C.

178

Chapter VI Table 6.1: Epigraphic evidence for the new Pythian Games City

Citation

Notes

Coins?

Date Attested

Alexandria Troas

OMS 2, 1153–1155; BÉ 1939, 329; IGRR 1.802.

• called the Smintheia Pauleia Isopythia

X

3rd c. AC

Ankyra

CIG 4016–4017; BÉ 1978, 489.

• known as the Asklepeia Isthmia Pythia, or the Asklepeia Soteria Pythia

X

AD 198–217, 253–268

Aphrodisias

Roueché (1981), 113–115, #7–8.

• known as the Pythia Valeriana

X

AD 253–268

Athens?

IG II2 2226, 2253, 2479.

• the name Puvqia is a restoration

Attouda

IGRR 4.844.

Caesarea Augusta

Moretti (1953), #85; ISyria 4.1265.

Carthage

IGRR 1.802.

Chalkedon

CIG 3676; IGRR 1.802, 4.161.

Daphne (Antioch)

Moretti (1953), #69.

Ephesos

Michaud (1970), 949–950; IEphesos 4.1108, 1110, 1147, 2073.

Hierapolis, Phrygia

IG II–III2 3169–3170; IGRR 4.824, 1761; BÉ 1971, 649; IEphesos 4.1132.

AD 221/2–229/30 AD 198–217? ca AD 193–221

• known as the Severeia Pythia

3rd c. AC X • identical with the Daphneia attested since the 3rd c. BC? • often associated with local Ephesea and Olympic Games

3rd c. AC AD 98–137

X

AD 218–238

X

2nd c. AC – AD 268

• apparently named after donor, Marius or Marianus • originally known as the Apolloneia Pythia, after Caracalla the Letoeia Pythia

Hierapolis-Kastabala IG II–III2 3169.

AD 253–257

Kyzikos

IGRR 1.802.

• these Isopythian games were sacred to Kore

Laodicea-ad-Mare

Moretti (1953), #85; OMS 2, 1153–1155?

• known as the Antoninia Pythia, possibly the Asklepeia Pythia

Magnesia, Lydia?

IG VII.49.

• inscription mentions only a Magnesia, without specifying the Lydian one

mid 3rd c. AC

Megara

IG VII.49, 106; Moretti (1953), #88.

• attested by Philostratos and scholiasts to Pindar1223

Hellenistic; ca AD 131/2– 3rd c. AC

Miletos

IG VII.49; IDidyma 2.332.

• known as the Panionia Pythia

X

A.D. 218–222, 253–268

Nikaia

BÉ 1978, 489; Íëahin (1987), 74–75.

• called variously the Valeriana Gallena Dionysia Pythia, or the Severia Augoustia Pythia

X

ca AD 190–268

1223

3rd c. AC

X

AD 198–ca 221

Philostratos, Lives of the sophists 1.24, 529. Scholiasts to Pindar's Olympian 7.157, 13.155, and Nemean 5.84. For the Pythian Games at Megara in the Hellenistic period, see Rigsby (1987).

179

Chapter VI Nikomedia?

Moretti (1953), #69?

Nysa

Bousquet (1992), 194.

Perge

• word Puvqia a reconstruction

IG VII.49; SEG 34.1306.

ca AD 98–137 ca AD 137–180

• known as the Valeriana or Gordianea Pythia Augousteia Asyleia

X

AD 251–275/6

X

AD 193–244

X

AD 198–222

• founded soon after Side received its Pythian Games in the 240s Perinthos

IGRR 1.802, 4.161.

Philippopolis

IG II–III2 3169–3170; IGRR 1.802.

• frequently associated with local Philadelphia and Aktian Games

• called Antoniniana Pythia 1224

Rome

Robert (1970), 23–27.

AD 218–222

Side

IG VII.49; SEG 31.1287; BÉ 1972, 500; BÉ 1982, 450; ISmyrna 667.

• known by many titles, namely Isopythian, Apollonian, Phoebeia, Gordianeia, and Antonineia

X

AD 243–259

Thessalonike

IG VII.49; IG X.2.38; Koumanoudis (1970), 58–60.

• sometimes known as Kabir(i)a

X

AD 240/1–260

• Elagabalus also founded Pythian Games at Thyatira (see below) and at Emesa (coins only)

• known as the Augousteia Pythia Thyatira

ISmyrna 667, 668.

AD 218–259

• founded by Elagabalus • sometimes associated with local Hadriana and Olympic Games

Tlos?

Moretti (1953), #83.

Tralleis

FD III.1.554–555; OMS 2, 1153–1155; IG II–III2 3169–3170; IG XII.8.190; IEphesos 4.1130, 4114; ISmyrna 659, 664; ITralleis 113, 117, 119, 143.

Trapezopolis

1224

BÉ 1976, 632.

• the Pythian victory of a boxer alluded to may have nothing to do with Tlos

• Pythian Games existed as early as the 1st c. B.C.1225 • often associated with local Augousteia and Olympic Games • known as the Pythia Epinikia

after AD 212

X

ca AD 175–268

AD 193–217?

Cf. Herodian 6.6–7.

1225

Robert (1937), 428–429; cf. idem (1959), 256–257. Olympic Games were reintroduced to Tralleis at about the same time, in 52 B.C. (Robert [1937], 418–428).

180

Chapter VI Introduction to the numismatic evidence The second witness to the phenomenon of new Pythian Games is numismatics. Agonistic reverse types became widespread on civic coinages of the 3rd c. A.C. and mirror the rapidly expanding number of iJeroi; kai; stefaniv t ai agw' n e" founded at that time.1226 Surprisingly, there has been no survey of all the Pythian Games coins minted in the period A.D. 193–268. For the purposes of this study, I have chosen to define as Pythian only those coins with the word PUQIA, or some abbreviation of it, in the reverse legend. The following catalogue thus ignores apparent allusions to Pythian Games, whether by depiction of an Apollo, a tripod, or apples, but deliberately so.1227 Unless that word actually appears on a coin there is no sure way of differrentiating one set of games from another held at the same city, because coinages of the Pythian Games usually drew upon a common pool of agonistic iconography that became wildly popular in the period A.D. 180–268. At Philippopolis, for instance, Pythian, Aktian, Severeian, and Philadelphian Games were all introduced within the space of a few years.1228 Consequently, it is not unreasonable to disqualify from consideration those reverse dies of any apparently single issue without the word PUQIA, even if they are of identical type to the PUQIA dies (e.g. at Thessalonike).1229 The list of coinages on the following pages surely errs on the conservative side with the omission of several issues where the allusion to local Pythian Games is a reasonable hypothesis.1230 The figures in parentheses are the the most likely numbers of dies used to strike all of the coins of a certain type, as determined by the Lyon Formula;1231 such data give one some idea of how many coins were originally in existence.

1226

Mitchell (1993), 218 and n.139. A few coinages of small cities scattered throughout mountainous Pisidia are exceptional for allusions to thematic, not hieroi, games that probably drew only a local crowd of contestants and spectators (225). 1227

Robert (1949b) has convincingly shown that the round objects frequently shown in association with agonistic reverse types were intended to be apples, which are attested as part of a Pythian victor's prize in the Roman period (Palatine anthology 9.357; Lucian, Anacharsis 9, 10, 13, 16, 36; Maximus of Tyre, Dissertatio 1.4, 34.8; Libanius, Progymnasmata: Laudationes 9.9; IG II2 3158). 1228

Schönert-Geiss (1965), 50–52. On the other hand, there is the example of Nysa in Lydia whose Pythian Games were attested for the first time in a recently published inscription (Bousquet [1992], 194, between A.D. 137 and 180) but whose coinage (with the rather common types of Apollo, a tripod, and a wreath) had never been recruited in support of such a hypothesis. 1229

Touratsoglou (1988), 271: die combinations 84, 85, 86 and 88 of Gordian III's emission 1b)5 are, for instance, identical to the rest of that emission except that they lack the reverse legend PUQIA. 1230

Alexandria Troas: Robert, (1930) 53–55; IGRR 1.802. Antioch on the Orontes: Moretti (1953), #69. Caesarea Augusta: Moretti (1953), #85. 1231

See Chapter III, page 84 for an explanation of the Lyon Formula.

181

Chapter VI ANKYRA Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies

Caracalla (A.D. 198–217)

1)

32

Crown with palm branch atop table; five apples below; ISOPUQIA in exergue

1? (1?)

1 (1)

2

"

2)1232

32

AS⁄KLHPEIA ⁄ SWTHREIA ⁄ ISOPUQIA ⁄ MHTROPOL. ⁄ ANKURA⁄C within wreath

1 (1)

1 (1)

1

"

4)

2? (3?)

2? (3?)

4

"

5)

31

Tyche of Ankyra seated on rock holds crown and palm in left hand, temple in right; ASKLPEIA [sic] SWTHREIA ISOPUQIA around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

6)

23

Crown inscribed AGWN with palm branch; five apples above; ISOPU⁄QIA in exergue

1? (1?)

2 (—)

2

"

7)

32

Three crowns with palm branches; ASKLHPEIA SWTHREIA ISOPUQIA around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

8)

29

Crown inscribed ASKLHPEIA with palm branch; second crown inscribed SWTHREIA with palm branch; ISOPUQIA in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

9)

25

Crown with palm branch and two purses atop table; five apples below; ISOPUQIA in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

10)

23

Pedimented stele inscribed ASKLH⁄PIA SW⁄THREIA ⁄ ISOPU⁄QIA

1? (1?)

2 (—)

2

"

11)

24

Crown with palm; MHTROP. ANKURAS; ISOPUQ⁄IA in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

19

Crown inscribed PU⁄QIA with two palm branches

3? (7?)

3? (7?)

4

"

2)

29

Three crowns; ...º AKTIA PUQIA MUSTIKOS around

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

3

"

3)

30

Crown with palm branch and two purses atop table; ASKLHPEIA SWTHREIA ISOPUQIA... around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

1232

28–30 Crown inscribed ISOPUQIA and palm branch; ASKLHPEIA SWTHREIA ª... around

The same obverse die was employed for types 1) and 2) of Caracalla's Pythian Games coinage at Ankyra.

182

Chapter VI APHRODISIAS1233 Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies Obv.

Anonymous (mid 3rd c. A.C.)

1)

30

Two crowns inscribed KAPETOL. and PUQIA atop table with OIKOUMENIKOS inscribed on its edge; EPI STRATONEIKOU ª... around

1 (1)

1 (1)

3

Gallienus (A.D. 253–268)

1)

27

Two crowns inscribed KAPET (or KAPETOL)1234 and PUQIA with palm branches atop table with edge inscribed OIKOUMENIKOS

10 (10)

14 (15)

38

EMESA Emperor

Elagabalus (A.D. 218–222)

Type

1)

Size (mm)

23

Reverse

Crown between two laurel branches; HLIA ⁄ PUQIA above and below; MHTR. OKO. EMI. around

Total Dies Obv.

Rev.

2? (3?)

2? (3?)

Total Specimens

4

EPHESOS Emperor

Elagabalus (A.D. 218–222)

Type

1)

Size (mm)

35

Reverse

Three crowns inscribed EFESIA, A, and P and a wreath inscribed OU atop a table with OIKOUMENIKOS AGWN inscribed on its edge; amphora and two palm branches below

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

2 (—)

2 (—)

2

Total Dies

HIERAPOLIS, PHRYGIA Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies Obv.

Anonymous (2nd–3rd c. A.C.)

1)

32

Two crowns inscribed PUQIA and AKTIA with palm branches atop a table; two amphorae below

2 (3)

2 (3)

4

"

2)

22

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Sardis: two wreaths inscribed P and C

2(3)

1? (1?)

3

"

3)

23

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Ephesos: two wreaths inscribed P and E

1? (1?)

2? (3?)

3

1233

This typology of Aphrodisian coins follows the scheme of Macdonald (1992).

1234

One reverse die has the inscription GORDIA(neiva) instead.

183

Chapter VI "

4)

24–25

PU⁄QI⁄A in wreath

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

5)

24

PU⁄QI⁄A in wreath

? (?)

? (?)

3

"

6)

24–25

PU⁄QI⁄A in wreath

? (?)

? (?)

5

Septimius Severus (A.D. 193–211)

1)

34

Flying Nike crowns Apollo Kitharoidos who stands before a table, atop which is a crown inscribed A P

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Caracalla (A.D. 198–217)

1)

37

Flying Nike crowns Apollo Kitharoidos who stands before a table, atop which is a crown inscribed A P

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

4

Elagabalus (A.D. 218–222)

1)

?

Apollo standing in front of a tripod, atop which is a crown inscribed PUQIA

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

2)

?

PUQIA in wreath

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

3)

37

Three temples, above which are two wreaths on either side of a crown; the left wreath is inscribed PUQIA

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Annia Faustina (A.D. 221)

1)

24

PU⁄QI⁄A in wreath

2 (—)

2 (—)

2

Sev. Alexander, Caesar (A.D. 221/2)

1)

30

Crown inscribed PUQIA

? (?)

? (?)

3

Otacilia Severa (A.D. 244–249)

1)

29

Crown inscribed PUA atop a table

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

6

"

2)1235

24

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Ephesos: two wreaths inscribed P and E

1 (1)

3? (4?)

6

"

3)

25

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Smyrna: two wreaths inscribed CRU⁄SA and PU⁄QI

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

"

4)

24–25

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Sardis: two wreaths inscribed CRU⁄SAN and PU⁄QI⁄A

1 (1)

? (?)

4

"

5)

23–24

PU⁄QIA in wreath

1 (1)

1? (1?)

4

"

6)

24

Crown inscribed PUQIA

1 (1)

1 (—)

1

"

7)

26

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Ephesos: two wreaths inscribed P and O

1 (1)

1 (—)

1

"

8)

28

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Sardis: two crowns inscribed P... and C...

? (?)

? (?)

4

"

9)

29

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Smyrna: two crowns inscribed PUQIA and KOINA ASIAS

? (?)

? (?)

4

Philip II, Caesar (A.D. 244–247)

1)

30

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Sardis: two crowns inscribed PUQIA and CRUSAN with palm branches

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

4

Gallienus (A.D. 253–268)

1)

26

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Sardis: two crowns inscribed PUQIA and CRUSANTINA [sic] atop table

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

1235

The same obverse die was employed for types 2)—7) of Otacilia Severa's Pythian Games coinage at Hierapolis.

184

Chapter VI "

2)

26?

Homonoia of Hierapolis and Smyrna: two crowns inscribed PUQIA and KOINA ASIAS atop table

3 (—)

3 (—)

3

LAODICEA AD MARE Emperor

Caracalla (A.D. 198–217)

Type

1)

Size (mm)

29–30

Reverse

Two centaurs, facing one another, holding crown and five apples between; ANTONINIA PYTHIA around; LAU. COL. ET / METROP. in exergue

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

3? (4?)

3 (4)

5

Total Dies

MILETOS Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies

Julia Soaemias (A.D. 218–222)

1)

30

Two crowns upon a table; MIHLSIQN B NEWKORWN TWN SEBASTWN OLUMPIA PUQIA around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

28

Crown and five apples atop table; two palm branches below; PANIWNIA PUQIA MI⁄LHSIWN around and in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

NIKAIA Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

1? (1?)

2 (2)

6

Total Dies

Valerian I (A.D. 253–260)

1)

25

Three crowns atop table; DIONUSIA PUQIA around

"

2)

25

Three crowns atop table; DI⁄ON ⁄ PUQ between table legs

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

"

3)

24

Three crowns; IEROS AGWN ⁄ PUQIA ⁄ NIKAIEWN around and in exergue

1 (1)

1 (1)

3

"

4)

24

PUQIA OUAL. GAL. IEROS AGWN NIKAIEWN

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

5)

24

DIONUSIA PUQIA SEBHRIA NIKAIEWN

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

6)

24

DIONUSIA PUQIA SEO. AUG. OUAL. GALLIH.

? (?)

? (?)

2

Gallienus (A.D. 253–268)

1)

25

Three crowns with palm branches atop table with its edge inscribed OUALE.; DIONUSIA PUQIA around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

2)

24

Three crowns atop table; five apples atop central crown, palm branches in the other two; PUQIA ⁄ SEUHRI. beneath table

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

185

Chapter VI "

3)

24

Three crowns on a base inscribed PUQIA; five apples atop central crown, palm branches in other two

1 (1)

1 (1)

3

"

4)

24

DIONUSIA PUQIA SEBHRIA NIKAIEWN

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

25

Three crowns atop table; five apples atop central crown, palm branches in the other two; PUQIA ⁄ SEUHRI⁄A AGOUSIA [sic] and garland beneath table

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

PERGAMON Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies

Caracalla? (A.D. 198–217)

1)

40

Two crowns, one inscribed [PUQIA], and a wreath inscribed OLUMPIA atop table; amphora below; EPI IOULIOU ANQIMOU ª... around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Valerian (A.D. 253–260)

1)

40

Two crowns inscribed PUQIA and AKTIA and a wreath inscribed OLUMPIA atop table; amphora and two purses below; EPI STRATHGOU AUR. DAMOU around

1 (1)

1 (1)

3

PERGE Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies

Volusianus (A.D. 251–253)

1)

31

Homonoia of Perge and Delphi: Artemis Pergaia and Pythian Apollo standing, facing one another; A ⁄ PU⁄QI⁄A between

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Valerian (A.D. 253–260)

1)

29

Homonoia of Perge and Delphi: Artemis Pergaia and Pythian Apollo standing, facing one another; A ⁄ PU⁄QI⁄A between

1? (1?)

1 (1)

4

"

2)

37

Crown inscribed PUQIA atop table; amphora and two palm branches below

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

Gallienus (A.D. 253–268)

1)

30

ASU⁄LIA PU⁄QIA PER⁄GAIWN ⁄ E IERA within a wreath

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

34

Crown inscribed PUQIA atop table; IEROS below

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Gallienus and Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

37

Crown inscribed PUQIA with two palms atop table with ASULIA inscribed on its edge

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

5

Valerian II (A.D. 253–258)

1)

29

Two wreaths inscribed PU⁄QI⁄A and OLU⁄MPI⁄A; IEROI below; ASULIA AU⁄GOUSTI⁄A in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

186

Chapter VI PERINTHOS Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies

Septimius Severus (A.D. 193–211)

1)

39–40

Two temples; above, two crowns and the words AKTIA PUQIA

2 (2)

2? (2?)

6

"

2)

27–29

Two crowns and two palm branches between, all atop table; amphora and five apples beneath; AKTIA PUQIA around

2 (2)

9? (13?)

16

"

3)

29

Crown inscribed PUQIA with five apples atop

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Caracalla (A.D. 198–217)

1)

40–43

Two temples; above, two crowns and the words AKTIA PUQIA

2 (2)

5 (5)

21

"

2)

34–35

Two crowns with palm branches atop table; amphora and five apples beneath; AKTIA PUQIA around

1 (1)

3 (3)

7

"

3)

27

1? (1?)

1 (1)

4

Geta, Caesar (A.D. 198–208)

1)

17–18

Crown inscribed PUQIA with five apples atop

2 (2)

1 (1)

5

Geta, Augustus (A.D. 209–212)

1)

37

Two temples; two crowns and the labels AKTIA PUQIA above; FILADELFIA ⁄ PERINQIWN ⁄ NEOKORWN in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

2)

35–36

Two crowns and two palm branches between, all atop table; amphora and five apples beneath; AKTIA PUQIA around; FILADELFIA ⁄ PERINQIWN ⁄ NEOKORWN in exergue

2 (—)

2 (—)

2

"

3)

28–30

Two crowns and two palm branches between, all atop table; amphora and five apples beneath; AKTIA PUQIA around

2 (2)

3 (4)

6

"

4)

18

Crown inscribed PUQIA with five apples atop

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Caracalla and Geta, Augusti (A.D. 209–212)

1)

32–34

Two crowns and two palm branches between, all atop table; amphora and five apples beneath; AKTIA PUQIA around

2 (2)

4 (6)

7

Elagabalus (A.D. 218–222)

1)

41

Two temples; two crowns and the labels AKTIA PUQIA above

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

3)

28

Two crowns with palm branches and a purse between, all atop table; five apples and amphora below; PUQIA ⁄ AKTIA above and in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Sev. Alexander (A.D. 222–235)

1)

39–41

Tyche of Perge standing, holding cornucopia in extended left hand, a temple in her raised right hand; below, two crowns with a purse and five apples, respectively; AKTI⁄A ⁄ PUQ⁄IA to left and right

1 (1)

1 (1)

9

"

2)

34

A purse, two crowns, and five apples, all atop table; amphora beneath; AKTIA PUQIA in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

3)

29

Crown inscribed PUQIA with five apples atop

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

4)

29

Two crowns with palm branches atop table; five apples and amphora beneath; AKTIA PU⁄QIA in exergue

2 (3)

2 (3)

3

PERIN⁄QIWN NE⁄OKORWN ⁄ AKTIA ⁄ PUQIA within wreath

187

Chapter VI Gordian III (A.D. 238–244)

1)

38–39

Tyche of Perge standing, holding a temple in each hand; below, two crowns with a purse and five apples, respectively; AKTI⁄A ⁄ PU⁄QI⁄A to left and right

1 (1)

1 (1)

3

"

2)

34–35

Two crowns with palm branches atop table; five apples and amphora beneath; AKTIA PUQI⁄A in exergue

1 (1)

2 (3)

4

"

2)

33–34

Apollo standing, left arm extended over altar inscribed PUQIA with five apples atop; his right arm rests upon snake-entwined tripod

2 (—)

2 (—)

2

PHILIPPOPOLIS Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies Obv.

Caracalla (A.D. 198–217)

1)

40–41

Diskobolos standing with discus in right hand, three apples in left hand; PU⁄QIA on either side

2 (2)

1 (1)

5

"

2)

41

Male figure, half-clad in chiton, standing and holding long staff in right hand; PUQI⁄A on either side

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

2a)

40

Apollo, clad in chlamys, stands holding bow in right hand, patera in outstretched left hand over snake-entwined tripod; PUQI⁄A on either side

2? (—)

2 (—)

2

"

3)

41

Herakles stands to right holding club in left hand, a lionskin draped over his folded right arm; PUQ⁄IA on either side

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

3a)

42

Herakles stands to left holding club in left hand, a lionskin draped over his folded right arm; PUQ⁄IA on either side

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

4)

40

Athena, standing to right, faces snake twined around tree; PU⁄QI to left

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

5)

41

Emperor stands to left holding victoriola in left hand, long staff in right; PUQ⁄IA on either side

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

6)

36

Crown inscribed PUQIA atop table; beneath, amphora, palm branch, and five apples

1? (1?)

3 (—)

3

"

7)

31

Nude Hermes standing left holds caduceus in downstretched left hand; PU⁄QIA on either side

1? (1?)

3 (—)

3

"

8)

29

Zeus enthroned to left holds a Nike in left hand, sceptre in right hand; PU⁄QI⁄A on either side

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

9)

29

Athlete standing to left holds wreath in left hand, palm branch in right; PU⁄QI⁄A in field

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

10)

30

Athlete standing to right holds palm branch in left hand, crowns self with right; PU⁄QI⁄A on either side

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

11)

30

KOI⁄NON QRA⁄KWN ALE⁄XANDRIA ⁄ PUQIA EN ⁄ FILIPPO⁄POLI in wreath

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

2

"

12)

30

Asklepios enthroned to left holds sceptre in right hand, patera in left, to which a snake rises; PU⁄QIA on either side

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

188

Chapter VI "

13)

30

Crown inscribed PUQIA

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Elagabalus (A.D. 218–222)

1)

35

Octostyle temple; KENDREISEIA PUQIA EN FILIPPO⁄POLI NEWKO⁄RW around and in exergue

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

4

"

2)

35

Octostyle temple with pellet mark in pediment; KENDREISEIA PUQIA EN FILIPPO⁄POLI NEWKO⁄RW around and in exergue

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

2

"

3)

36

Crown and five apples atop table; beneath, an amphora and two palm branches KENDREISEIA PUQIA EN FILIPPO⁄POLI NEWKO⁄RW around and in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

4)

22

Crown inscribed Pª...ºA with two palm branches

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

PRUSA Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

1? (1?)

1 (1)

3

Total Dies

Valerian (A.D. 253–260)

1)

24

Two crowns, the one one on the right with seven apples atop; OLUMPIA PUQIA ⁄ PROUSA⁄EWN around and in exergue

Gallienus (A.D. 253–268)

1)

24

Two crowns, the left one with a palm branch, the right one with five apples atop; OLUMPIA PUQIA ⁄ PROUSA⁄EWN around and in exergue

1 (1)

1 (1)

4

Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

23

Two crowns, the left one with a palm branch, the right one with five apples atop; OLUMPIA PUQIA ⁄ PROUSA⁄EWN around and in exergue

1 (1)

1 (1)

3

SIDE Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

1? (1?)

1 (1)

2

? (?)

1 (1)

2

Total Dies

Tranquillina (A.D. 241–244)

1)

34

Apollo Kitharoidos standing to right before a table with a crown inscribed PUQIA and palm branch atop; below, an amphora

Philip II, Caesar (A.D. 244–247)

1)

32

Crown with two palm branches supported by two Nikai facing one another; IS AIWNA TA PUQIA ⁄ SIDHTWN around and in exergue

"

2)

34

Crown inscribed IEROS atop table inscribed SIDHTWN on its edge; ISOPUQIOS around

1? (1?)

1 (1)

2

Trajan Decius (A.D. 249–251)

1)

31

Nike flying left crowns Apollo Kitharoidos standing to right in front of table with crown inscribed PUQIA and two purses atop; beneath, a palm branch; to left, an amphora

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Valerian (A.D. 253–260)

1)

38

Homonoia of Side and Delphi: crown with two palm branches supported by two Nikai facing one another; SIDHTWN DELFWN ⁄ OMONOIA around and in exergue

1 (1)

2 (3)

4

189

Chapter VI "

2)

38

Homonoia of Side and Delphi: clothed Apollo of Side standing right and holding staff receives crown from nude Pythian Apollo standing left and resting his right elbow on a snake-entwined tripod; IEROS in field

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

"

3)

36

Two crowns inscribed IERA PUQIA with palm branches

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

4)

25

Nude Apollo stands facing with left arm raised and cornucopia and chlamys cradled on right arm; SIDHTWN PUQIOS around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

5)

34

Two crowns with palms atop table with NEWKORWN inscribed on its edge; beneath, IERA PUQIA ⁄ IEROS MUS⁄TIKOS

2? (—)

2? (—)

2

Gallienus (A.D. 253–268)

1)

31

Temple with A in pediment and IERA ⁄ PUQIA ⁄ PRWTA ⁄ PAMFU⁄LWN between columns

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

2

Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

28

Crown with palm braches atop tripod; purse to left; amphora to right; SIDHTWN PUQIA around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

2)

30

Crown inscribed PUª ºIA with palm branches atop table; PRWTA PAMFULWN ⁄ SI⁄DH⁄TWN around and in exergue

1 (1)

2 (—)

2

TABAI, LYDIA Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

24

Crown inscribed OLUMPIA atop table; PUQIA between table legs

Rev.

Total Specimens

1 (1)

6

Total Dies

1 (1)

THESSALONIKE1236 Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Total Dies Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

Gordian III (A.D. 240/1–244)

1b)1

24–26

Tripod and wreath

3 (4)

3 (4)

5

"

1b)2

24–26

Tripod, apples, and crown

5 (6)

3 (3)

13

"

1b)3

25–26

Tripod and crown

12 (13)

9 (9)

31

"

1b)4

24–25

Crown with palm branch

1 (1)

2 (2)

7

"

1b)5

24–25

Tripod and apples

5 (5)

4 (4)

16

"

1c)

24–26

Crown

1236

17 (18) 18 (19)

This typology of Thessalonikan coins follows the scheme of Touratsoglou (1988).

190

61

Chapter VI "

1d)1

25–26

Apollo standing left holds laurel branch in downstretched left hand and rests right elbow upon a kithara atop a column; below, a crown and five apples to left, a strung bow to right

2 (3)

2 (3)

4

"

1d)3

24–26

Apollo standing left holds Kabiros in outstretched left hand, laurel branch and bow in right hand

5 (6)

3 (3)

10

"

1d)4

23–26

Apollo standing left holds Kabiros in outstretched left hand, laurel branch in right hand

1 (1)

1(1)

5

"

1e)

23–25

Laurel branch and palm branch

2 (2)

2 (2)

9

"

1g)

24–25

Nike holding wreath and palm branch

1 (1)

1 (1)

4

"

1j)1

24–26

Temple facing left

11 (13)

8 (9)

23

"

1j)2

24–25

Temple facing right

6 (26)

4 (6)

7

"

1k)

24–25

Crown with palm branch, five apples, and purse all atop table; amphora with palm branch below

7 (11)

6 (8)

11

Tranquillina1237 (A.D. 241–244)

1a)

25

Tripod

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

"

1b)

27

Crown

1 (1)

1 (—)

1

"

1c)

25

Apollo standing left holds laurel branch in downstretched left hand and rests right elbow upon a kithara atop a column; below, a crown and five apples to left

1 (1)

1 (—)

1

"

1d)

24, 28

Laurel branch and palm branch

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

"

1e)

25

Temple

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

Philip I (A.D. 244–249)

1a)

24–26

Temple; PUQIA in exergue

5 (5)

7 (8)

24

"

1b)

24–25

Tripod

3 (4)

4 (6)

7

"

1d)

23

Apollo and Kabiros stand facing one another; between them, an ivory tusk standing in a receptacle, a crown with palm branch

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

1e)

24–26

Nike with a laurel branch and palm branch; crown with palm branch, five apples all at feet; PUQIA in exergue

2 (2)

2 (2)

5

"

1g)

24–26

Apollo standing left lifts left hand holding laurel branch above head and rests right elbow upon snake-entwined column; before him, a crown with palm branches atop a tripod; PU⁄QI⁄A in left field and in exergue

4 (4)

6 (8)

12

"

1h)

24–26

Crown with palm branch, apples, and amphora all atop table

5 (5)

4 (4)

15

"

1i)

24–25

Crown with palm branch, five apples; PUQIA in field

3 (3)

3 (3)

8

"

1k)

25

KA⁄BIRIA ⁄ PUQIA ⁄ D.B.I in wreath

2 (—)

2? (—)

2

1237

All of Tranquillina's Pythian Games coins at Thessalonike were struck from a single obverse die. Her coins of that city were thus extremely limited in number and probably all struck on the same occasion.

191

Chapter VI Otacilia Severa (A.D. 244–249)

1a)

25

Nike with a laurel branch and palm branch

1 (1)

1(1)

3

"

1b)

26

Temple

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

1c)

24–26

Apollo standing left before a tripod with five apples atop; behind him, a snake-twined column

2 (2)

3 (4)

6

"

1e)

24

Crown inscribed PUQIADI:B: with apples atop

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

1f)

23

Crown, apples, and purse atop table; amphora beneath

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Philip II, Caesar (A.D. 244–247)

1a)

25

Temple; five apples

2 (2)

3 (4)

7

"

1d)

24

Crown with palm branch, five apples, and amphora all atop table

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

1e)

25

Tripod with crown and palm branch

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

1f)

26

Crown with palm branch

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

1h)

24–25

Apollo in aedicula holding Kabiros before a tripod with five apples atop

1 (1)

1 (1)

7

Valerian I (A.D. 253–260)

1)

28–30

Two crowns inscribed PUQIA AKTIA with palm branches and purse all atop table

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

"

2)

22–23

Crown inscribed PUQIA with palm branch

2 (—)

2 (—)

2

Gallienus (A.D. 253–259)

1b)

28–30

Two crowns with palm branches atop table; purse in field

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

1c)

27–30

Two wrestlers; wreath and palm branch in field

1 (1)

1 (1)

4

"

1i)

27

Athlete crowns himself with right hand; crown and palm branch in field

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

2)

22

Two crowns with palm branches; PU⁄QIA inscribed across them

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Salonina1238 (A.D. 253–259)

2a)

25

Tripod with five apples atop

1 (1)

1 (1)

2

"

2b)

23–24

Crown inscribed PUQIA

2 (3)

2 (3)

3

Salonina (A.D. 259–268)

1)

20

Crown inscribed PUQIA

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

1238

The same obverse die was employed for both issues of Salonina's Pythian Games coinage at Thessalonike.

192

Chapter VI THYATIRA Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Obv.

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies

Anonymous (3rd c. A.C.)

1)

20

Crown inscribed AU(gouste)IA with palm branches; PUQIA in exergue

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Elagabalus1239 (A.D. 218–222)

1)

45

AUGOU⁄STEIA ⁄ PUQIA ⁄ QUATEI⁄RHNW⁄N in wreath; EPI STR T KASTRATOU EIKIANOU around outside

1 (1)

1 (—)

1

"

2)

43

Emperor standing to right presents crown to Apollo standing to left; between them an altar; above, PUQ⁄IA

1(1)

1 (—)

1

Annia Faustina (A.D. 221)

1)

34

Emperor standing to right presents crown to Tyche of Thyatira standing to left; between them, PU⁄QIA

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Valerian (A.D. 253–260)

1)

40

Two crowns with palm branches atop table; below, an amphora; above, AUG⁄OUSTEIA PU⁄QIA ⁄ ADRIANA OLUMPI⁄A

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

TRALLEIS Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies Obv.

Anonymous (mid 3rd c. A.C.)

1)

21

Crown inscribed PUQIA

2? (2?)

2? (2?)

7

"

2)

36

Crown inscribed PUQIA and wreath inscribed O⁄LU⁄MP⁄IA atop table; below, an amphora

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Septimius Severus (A.D. 193–211)

1)

39

Synodos of the Olympic Games holding uncertain object over right shoulder stands to right to greet Synodos of the Pythian Games who holds an apple in his right hand; between them, an altar

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Caracalla (A.D. 198–217)

1)

36

Two wreaths inscribed OLUM⁄PIA and PU⁄QIA, between which a star, atop table; below, two palm branches crossed

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Elagabalus (A.D. 218–222)

1)

34

Three wreaths inscribed O⁄LUM⁄PI⁄A, AU⁄GOU⁄STEI⁄A, and PU⁄QI⁄A atop table

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Tranquillina (A.D. 241–244)

1)

29

Five apples between two wreaths, all atop table; PUQIA in left field; OLUMPIA in right field; EPI GRA FILIPPOU KENTA above

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

"

2)

30

Wreath around snake-entwined tripod; TRALLIA:PUQIA around

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Valerian (A.D. 253–260)

1)

35

Wreath inscribed O⁄LUM⁄PIA and crown inscribed PUQIA with palm branches, all atop table; below, an amphora

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

1239

The same obverse die was employed for both issues of Elagabalus's Pythian Games coinage at Thyateira.

193

Chapter VI Gallienus (A.D. 253–268)

1)

19

Crown inscribed PUQIA with palm branches

2? (3?)

2? (3?)

3

Salonina (A.D. 253–268)

1)

35

Five apples between two wreaths, all atop table; PUQIA in left field; OLUMPIA in right field; EPI GRA FILIPPOU KENTA above; TRALLI⁄ANWN below

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

TRIPOLIS, LYDIA Emperor

Type

Size (mm)

Reverse

Rev.

Total Specimens

Total Dies Obv.

Anonymous (mid 3rd c. A.C.)

1)

32

Crown inscribed LHTWEIA with palm branches atop table with edge inscribed PUQIA; amphora below

2? (3?)

1? (1?)

3

"

2)

31

Leto fleeing to left carrying the infants Artemis and Apollo; to the right, a crown inscribed LHTWEIA and two purses atop table; beneath table, an amphora

3? (3?)

3 (3)

8

"

3)

28

LH⁄TWEIA ⁄ PUQI⁄A within wreath

1 (—)

1 (—)

1

Gallienus (A.D. 253–268)

1)

32

Crown inscribed LHTWEIA with palm branches and two purses, all atop table; PU⁄QI⁄A between table legs

2 (3)

2 (3)

3

"

2)

33

LH⁄TWEIA ⁄ PUQI⁄A within wreath

1? (1?)

1? (1?)

3

Gordian III (at Thessalonike, Ephesos, and Side), and under Valerian and Gallienus (e.g. at Perge). The sporadic issues of these Pythian coins belie the continual popularity of Pythian Games during the 3rd c. A.C. that the inscriptions commemorate. This naturally indicates that not every local Pythiad was marked by a coinage.

Nineteen different cities in Thrace, Asia Minor, and the Near East minted explicitly Pythian coins; another eight have only the attestation of inscriptions.1240 At eleven of the nineteen cities that struck explicitly Pythian coinages, these games first appeared on coins of Septimius Severus, his sons, or Elagabalus (A.D. 193–222). In many cases, Pythian types then cease, though six cities out of the nineteen resumed minting them under Valerian and Gallienus (A.D. 253–268). Seven other cities minted Pythian coins for the first time under Valerian and Gallienus. But only three cities (Thyatira and Tralleis in Lydia, and Hierapolis in Phrygia) struck during the three intervening decades between Elagabalus and Valerian. According to the inscriptional data, ten cities held their Pythian Games for the first time during the Severan period. A few new Puv q ia are attested epigraphically under Severus Alexander (at Perinthos), under Maximinus and

Before examining these coinages in more detail, let us establish their formal characteristics. All the coins are of bronze and fit into the denominational system of their issuing city.1241 Marks of value are encountered only in certain issues from cities of mid 3rd c. A.C. Pamphylia, so diametre, which can range from 17mm to 43mm, is our principal criterion of value. In a few cases, published studies have established values for the city coinages in terms of the bronze and increasingly debased silver minted in Italy and the West.1242 The conventional wisdom has been to correlate the civic issues of smallest module with the lowest denomination coin of the West in common circulation by the late 2nd c. A.C., the a s, and the larger coins

1240

Pythian Games venues attested only by inscriptions are Athens (?: IG II2 2226+2253+2479); Attouda (IGRR 4.844); Carthage (IGRR 1.802); Hierapolis–Kastabala (IG II2 3169; cf. J. and L. Robert [1965], 149); Kalchedon (IGRR 1.802 and 4.161; cf. Rigsby [1987], 94–96); Megara (IG VII.1.106; cf. Rigsby [1987], 93–102); Rome (L. Robert [1970], 6–17); and Trapezopolis (J. and L. Robert [1976], 632). The inscriptions congregate in the first half of the 3rd c. A.C., which is in keeping with the numismatic allusions, although inscriptions cannot usually be dated so precisely as coins. And whereas we may be reasonably confident of possessing at least one example of every Pythian coinage ever minted, there surely exist lost or as-yet undiscovered inscriptions that would alter the precise balance.

1241

Bronze, commonly abbreviated by numismatists to Æ, is a term of convenience used to denote a wide variety of alloys that are composed primarily of copper (70–90%) with admixtures of some or all of the following: tin, lead, and zinc. The designation thus includes the alloy known today as brass (orichalcum).

1242

194

For example, Macdonald (1992), 17–23.

Chapter VI with the more valuable sestertius (worth four asses).1243

had a distinctly local relevance and was not easily transferable.

Hoard and excavation evidence establish another characteristic of most local coinages: they very seldom circulated beyond their issuers' territory. There are some exceptions in the case of Aphrodisias, which traded widely in marble, or the cities of Pamphylia, Pisidia, and W. Cilicia who shared one another's coins, or the occasional appearance of large, so-called medallions from Thracian mints in German legionary camps;1244 but suffice it to say that the amount of any Pythian coinage that circulated as currency beyond its issuer's borders was minimal.

Pythian coins of Thessalonike Table 6.2: Coinage of Thessalonike

Emperor

The degree to which the dies of Pythian coinages were integrated into a city's other issues varied somewhat from place to place. The games coins were after all legal tender, even the so-called medallions over 35mm across, and as such did operate within the existing local system. The issue of Pythian-type coins was generally self-contained within each city, for there is little evidence of the die-sharing that Konrad Kraft has shown was widespread among the cities of Asia Minor.1245 The only exception known to me is the sharing of an obverse die of Elagabalus (A.D. 218–222) between Tralleis and Ephesos, though the reverses paired with this die of course differed in each city. The Ephesian Type 1 of Elagabalus (35mm) shows on its reverse three inscribed crowns and one inscribed wreath atop a table, and below an amphora with palm branches, whereas its Type 1 counterpart from Tralleis (34mm) shows three inscribed wreaths atop a table. The shared obverse die has a special significance in this case: inscribed wreaths on the Trallian read OLUMPIA AUGOUSTEIA PUQIA, whereas the legend on the Ionian coin runs EFESIA A P ∆O(l)U(mpiva). The letters A and P have traditionally been expanded to ∆A(ktiv a ) and P(uv q ia), but AU(gousteiva) would be more à propos in view of the shared obverse die, especially since this is the only known Pythian issue from Ephesos.1246 If the two cities held some kind of joint festival it would not be surprising for their commemorative coinages to be shared also. In only two other instances (at Lydian Tripolis and again at Tralleis) was the obverse of a Pythian coin reused for another city's non-Pythian coinage (at Lydian Nysa and Eumeneia respectively).1247 Evidently, each city's Pythian coinage 1243

All Types

Pythian Types

Obv. Rev. Dies Dies

Obv. Rev. Dies Dies

Total Specimens All Pythian Types Types

Gordian III (241–244)

29 108 27 (29) (116) (27)

59 (61)

308

206

Tranquillina (241–244)

1 (1)

8 (11)

1 (1)

5 (8)

14

8

Philip I (244–249)

11 (11)

41 (46)

10 (10)

26 (28)

103

73

Otacilia Severa (244–249)

3 (5)

12 (13)

3 (4)

7 (8)

19

12

Philip II (244–247)

5 (5)

12 (13)

4 (4)

7 (8)

29

17

Valerian (253–256)

4 (4)

17 (24)

3 (7)

3 (7)

30

4

Gallienus (253–ca 258)

9 (9)

23 (32)

4 (6)

4 (6)

41

7

Salonina (253–ca258

5 (5)

19 (26)

2 (2)

3 (4)

34

5

Valerian II (256–258)

1 (1)

3 (–)

0 (0)

0 (0)

3

0

Gallienus (259)

1 (1)

3 (7)

0 (0)

0 (0)

4

0

Salonina (259)

1 (–)

1 (–)

1 (–)

1 (–)

1

1

The Pythian Games coinage of Thessalonike is the most extensive known and thus deserves an in-depth discussion. Table 6.2 summarizes Touratsoglou's collection of dies and specimens from the Thessalonike mint. The bracketed figures are the most

M. Amandry et al. (1992), 30–37.

1244

Aphrodisias: Macdonald (1976), 40–47. Coin-sharing in southern Asia Minor: Kromann (1989), 156. Legionary camps: SchönertGeiss (1965), 39. 1245

Kraft (1972).

1246

Kraft (1972), pl. 13.17a–b. SNG von Aulock 1905.

(two purses and crown inscribed "Letoeia" with palms atop table, "Pythia" below) and a non-agonistic type from Eumeneia (pl. 54.43a–b). Kraft occasionally draws stylistic similarities between the portrait styles of two Pythian cities (e.g. Valerian's Type 1 at Pergamon and at Thyateira, pl. 47.68–69), and the same engraver surely cut the portraits of Elagabalus's Types 1 and 3 at Philippopolis as did for another large, non-Pythian bronze from Perinthos (BMC Thrace, 156, #56). But as a rule, very few agonistic coinages from one city can be die-linked with issues from elsewhere.

1247

The other obverse die-links indicated by Kraft (1972), pl. 25.138a–b are between Tralleis's Valerian Type 1 (wreath and crown with palms, inscribed "Olympia" and "Pythia" respectively, atop a table, and an amphora beneath) and an agonistic coin of Nysa (crown inscribed "Theogamia" with palms); and Tripolis's Gallienus Type 1

195

Chapter VI

obverse dies V13 and V36.1253 These two dies of Gordian, along with all of Tranquillina's dies, form a discrete group without connection to any other of the issues of A.D. 241–244, which may reflect a chronological gap rather than an organizational separation. All of the Pythian types represented within the group are repeated more extensively outside of it, perhaps because the new Pythian types were first tried out on a limited scale or during a transitional period. In any case, the initial Pythian coinages of Thessalonike were an integral part of the city's emissions in terms of both dies and extant examples.

probable number of dies used for the original coin population, as calculated by the Lyon Formula.1248 Thessalonike issued the largest and most varied series of Pythian coins of any city with 333 specimens struck from 54 obverse and 106 different reverse dies, seven of which were used in conjunction with the obverse, portrait dies of more than one individual. The coins span a period from the middle of Gordian III's reign (A.D. 241) until very late in Valerian's (A.D. 259); and a single specimen of Salonina's from the time of Gallienus's sole reign (A.D. 259) is known. All the Pythian type issues up to the accession of Valerian in A.D. 253 were of the same 4-assarion denomination as most of the rest of contemporary Thessalonikan coinage (24–26mm).1249 The reverse types for Pythian coins issued before A.D. 244 are seldom informative about details of local cult, since they draw upon the stock elements of a prize crown, a tripod, apples, and palm branches. Two items with local relevance are the representation of a Kabiros with a figure of Apollo and the representation of the neokorate temple that Gordian III permitted the Thessalonikans to build.1250 The former type is significant in view of the fact that the Pythian Games also had the title of Kabiria.1251

Some extraordinary occasion must have prompted the extensive coinage of A.D. 241–244, and that event was probably the visit of the young emperor and his army in, or immediately before, A.D. 242. That was the year he headed to the Danube with the Praetorian Prefect Timesitheus to repel a Gothic invasion; within a year, the two were on the march again, this time against the newly-founded Sassanid empire. On his way to the East, the emperor had passed through Thessalonike, which was a port situated on the via Egnatia between Macedonia and the Hellespont. His visit was also the occasion for granting Thessalonike neokorate status, which found mention on most of the A.D. 241–244 coinage but none of the A.D. 238–241 issues.1254 One may suppose that this adventus was the occasion for Thessalonike's first Pythian Games, because a number of coins struck for Philip I and Otacilia Severa in A.D. 245 or shortly thereafter mention the second, quadrennial Pythiad at Thessalonike. In addition, the association of Pythian Games with a grant of neokorate status is attested elsewhere (e.g. at Philippopolis).

Pythian types were especially common among Thessalonike's issues for Gordian III between A.D. 241 and 244. The volume of coinage in these years was much greater (29 obverse and 108 reverse dies) than previously in Gordian's reign (10 obverse and 38 reverse dies). If the later coins were struck over the three year period and not all at once, the Thessalonike mint would have had an output comparable to that of Corinth at its busiest in the Neronian years.1252 Exactly 59 of the reverse dies employed in the period A.D. 241–244 bore explicitly Pythian types, and they were paired with all but two of the 29 obverse dies in use at that time.

The coinage Thessalonike struck in the name of emperor Philip I (Type 1g), his empress Otacilia Severa, and their son Philip II between A.D. 244 and 245 was smaller in scale than that of the previous reign. Allusions to the Pythian Games still outnumber other reverse types: 26 of Philip I's 41 reverse dies, seven of Otacilia's 12 reverse dies, and seven of Philip II's 12 reverse dies have explicitly Pythian types. These reverse dies were well integrated into the whole civic coinage so that only one obverse die of Philip I's 11 obverse dies (V8) and one of Philip II's five obverse dies (V4) were never combined with a Pythian reverse. Total output was lower now than in Gordian's reign, since only one, two, or a maximum of three obverse dies seem perhaps, by the sharing of reverse dies between one another, to have been struck for Philip I at any one time. Small, discrete issues were also made in the names of Otacilia Severa and Philip II, especially in A.D. 244/5. Once again the Pythian reverse dies were well integrated into the whole civic coinage.

Pythian types also dominated the limited coins struck in the name of the empress Tranquillina: her single obverse die was used in combination with eight reverse dies, of which five mentioned the Pythian Games. Three of her eight reverses were shared with Gordian's

1248

The Lyon Formula is explained in Chapter III, page 84.

1249

A smaller denomination of 17–20mm that lacked imperial portraits was minted up to ca A.D. 260 (Touratsoglou [1988], 336–339, 348–350: pseudo-autonomous emission VI, groups MM, P, Q; emissions VIII–XI; emission XII group E).

1250

Kabiroi, for they are almost always encountered in the plural, were non-Hellenic divinities that came to be attached as auxiliaries to the sanctuaries of major gods (Schachter [1996], 267). One or two Kabiroi can also be found on non-Pythian Games coins of Thessalonike at this time (e.g. Touratsoglou [1988], 276–281, emissions 1d–i of Gordian III). 1251

1253

All of Roman Thessalonike's obverse and reverse dies, designated by the letters V and R respectively, were identified by Touratsoglou; and her data furnishes the data for the following discussion ([1988], tables 21–24).

Touratsoglou (1988), 297, emission 1k (Philip I).

1252

Michel Amandry's emission periods XIX–XXIV (late Claudian through A.D. 69) are each represented by a number of dies hitherto almost unprecedented at Corinth ([1988] 138–139).

1254

196

See page 197 below.

Chapter VI

other words sometime during 254 A.D.1257 This would place the first occasion of these games in A.D. 242 and associate them with Gordian III's Gothic victory soon after his visit to Thessalonike.1258 The date of A.D. 242 is independently corroborated by the evidence of Pythian Games coins dating to the second half of Gordian III's reign. Such a date is consistent with mentions of Thessalonike's Pythian Games in athletes' catalogues of the mid 3rd c. A.C. and Thessalonike's receipt of a neokorate title from Gordian III.1259 A few years later in A.D. 250, Trajan Decius granted the city the status of a colonia.1260

Among those issues struck during the joint reign of Valerian and Gallienus (A.D. 253–257/8), the proportion of Pythian reverse types on the coinage of Thessalonike fell significantly. Only four of Valerian's 17 reverse dies are Pythian, a ratio similar to Gallienus's five out of 23 reverses, and somewhat more than Salonina's three out of 19 reverses. Valerian's coinage falls neatly into three periods of emission, A.D. 253 to 255 (V1/R1–4), A.D. 255 to 256 (V2/R5–8, 10) and A.D. 256 (V3–4/R9, 11–17); but in each period only a single reverse die bears Pythian Games types. During the period A.D. 254 to 259 the dies for coins in the name of Gallienus also sort themselves into nine discrete groups with but one obverse die each; only once is a reverse die shared by more than one obverse (R8, by V3 and V4). Only five reverse dies bore Pythian types and they were used at intervals over a four–year period. Those issues struck for Salonina at this time also follow a similar pattern.1255

The best-preserved, front face of the Kallithea catalogue contains the names of all those who won victories in the athletic contests, subdivided into four age categories.1261 The left face is badly damaged but clearly listed the victors in musical contests of the same sort commonly found at Delphi; and the right face, which has suffered complete erasure, may have borne the names of those successful in the equestrian contests.1262 The preamble at the top of the front face deserves quotation and some comment for what it says

The progressive simplification of the die patterns over the period A.D. 241 to 259 is due to lower totals of extant coins struck from fewer and fewer dies after Gordian's death. Most of all the Thessalonikan coinage struck for Philip I was produced within his first two years. Under the later emperors Valerian and Gallienus, output was lower than previously but fairly constant for the years A.D. 253 to 258. A slight hiatus may have occurred before the final few coins of A.D. 259 were issued in the names of Gallienus and Salonina.1256

1257

Louis Robert (1938), 57–58 apparently miscounted his years to arrive at A.D. 252 as the date of this base and the fourth Pythiad at Thessalonike. The Aktian era began in the summer of 31 B.C., which meant that the last day of the 30th Actian year fell in the summer of 1 B.C.; and since there was of course no year 0, the end of Actian year 31 fell in the summer of A.D. 1. Consequently, the end of Actian year 284 fell in the summer of A.D. 254. The same means of reckoning will show that the 400th Macedonian year, whose era commenced with the Roman annexation in 146 B.C., fell in A.D. 254/5 by our calendar.

Although it has been suggested that the first Pythian Games coins of Thessalonike were issued in connection with a visit to the city of the emperor Gordian III in A.D. 241/2, it still remains to be determined whether that adventus was the actual occasion for the foundation of those games, or whether Gordian's presence merely enhanced a pre-existing festival. It is fortunate that the epigraphic record can elucidate this point, for one inscription furnishes a precise year for the inception of the Pythian Games at Thessalonike. I G X.II.38 consists of three texts inscribed upon a marble statue base discovered at Kallithea, near Thessalonike. The preamble on the front face of the base dates the catalogues of victors inscribed on its left and right faces to the fourth occasion that these games were held at Thessalonike, in the 284th year of the Aktian era (A.D. 253/4) and the 400th year of the Macedonian era (A.D. 254/5), in

1258

The writers of the Augustan History confirm that Gordian III campaigned successfully in the Balkans in A.D. 242 whilst on his way to deal with a Sassanid incursion into northern Mesopotamia (The three Gordians 26.4). 1259

IG VII.49 (from Megara); the other catalogue is so fragmentary that the mention of Pythian Games at Qeºs≥salonªivkh/ is wholly conjectural (Koumanoudis [1970]). For the neokorate status of Thessalonike, see Robert (1938), 53. 1260

IG X.II.1.162–165, 167. The new status is also proclaimed on most coins of Trajan Decius (Touratsoglou [1988], 302–303, emissions I–II). 1261

Robert (1938), 56–57: Puqikoi; (pai'de"), pai'de", agevneioi, and a[ndre". No more than two age categories are attested at contemporary Delphi (see Chapter IV, page 135). 1262

Robert (1938), 55–56. Traces from the left face read: saªlpigktav" ... (line 1); khvªruka" ... (line 2); poªihta;" ejpw'n ... (line 4); t≥r≥ªagw/douv" ... (line 10); ki≥ªqaristav" ... (line 11); and kiªqarw/douv" ... (line 12). It is regrettable that no trace of equestrian contests at the Pythian Games of Thessalonike is preserved, since there is very little evidence for such contests at the games of Roman Delphi (see Chapter IV, page 131). But one can at least be sure that Thessalonike's games included chariot races, owing to a mosaic fragment now in the city museum (6722, Misdrachi-Kapon [1986], 153, 155, and fig. 162). The polychrome mosaic was discovered in a private house of the Roman city, in the vicinity of the modern Od. Egnatias and Od. Antigonidon, and appears from its letter style to date to the 3rd c. A.C. It consists chiefly of the right half of a panel illustrating four horses pulling a chariot to the right. Two victory crowns, each one inscribed PUQIA, rest on the top edge of the panel; and it seems likely that two more crowns rested on the top, left edge of the panel illustration to maintain its symmetry.

1255

It is also under Valerian I that different denominations with the imperial effigy on the obverse were struck simultaneously. The denomination struck hitherto, which Touratsoglou (1988), 100–101 supposes was worth 4 assaria (24–26mm) continued in production but was supplemented by some 6-assarion pieces (28–30mm) and, in Valerian's name only, some 3(?)-assarion pieces (22–23mm). On the final coinage of Gallienus and Salonina in A.D. 259/60, confusion was apparently averted by the appearance of a numeral to denote a value of either 4 or 6 assaria. 1256

Kromann (1989), 153.

197

Chapter VI

other hand, it is entirely possible that the multitude of derivative Pythian, and Olympic, Games of the middle Empire were generally perceived as belonging to a minor league of contests for less than wildly successful athletes.1267 The modern analogy cannot be extended too far, for there existed no rule to prevent any athlete or musician from competing at Olympia or Delphi if he so desired, and vice versa. The Kallithea inscription also shows that the possible status of the Thessalonike games had little effect on their drawing power, since only three of the victors were local athletes; the rest came from Greece, western Asia Minor, and even Alexandria. On the other hand, the absence of a victor in the men's wrestling contest is phrased in such a way as to suggest insufficient interest in this event.1268 One might also argue that the level of competition was less stiff at Thessalonike than it might have been at, say, Olympia from the fact that some athletes were victorious in more than one event;1269 but since the same phenomenon is frequently encountered in all periods in the lists of Olympic victors, it more likely reflects true prowess than a lack of strong competition.1270 What one would rather know is if the Pythian Games of Thessalonike were as wildly popular with the viewing public as the profusion of local coinage suggests. It is impossible to say for certain, though the prospect of a festival as grand as the material record suggests must surely have piqued the interest of the urban poor.1271

about the extent to which the Pythian Games of Thessalonike were modelled after those of Delphi:

5

∆Apovllwni Puqivw/ oiJ ∆Amfiktuvone" kai; oiJ ajgwnoqevtai th'" dæ ªPuºqiªavdºo", uJpo; ejpimelhth;n Baivbion Terrai'on Neikovstraton to;n ajx(iologwvtaton) grammateva tw'n Puqivwn. “Etou" dpsæ Seb(astou') tou' kai; uæ. Eujtucei'te.

One can see a good deal of overlap with Delphi in administrative terminology. Louis Robert seems quite justified in supposing that the Amphiktyony mentioned here was Thessalonike's own, which was probably constituted at the time when these games were instituted.1263 Both the Amphiktyons and the ajgwnoqevtai are modified by the phrase "..of the 4th Pythiad," by which is meant of course the fourth Pythiad of Thessalonike, not of Delphi. Thus, by extension, the Amphiktyons are also modified by the unexpressed qualifier of Thessalonike, not Delphi. The chairman (ejpimelhthv") of this Amphiktyony, Baebius Terraeus Nikostratos, was apparently the principal individual in charge of organizing the games, much like his counterpart in the Delphic Amphiktyony; and his concomitant duty as grammateu;" tw'n Puqivwn likely had parallels there as well.1264 One departure from attested Delphic practice is the appointment of more than a single agonothetes to shoulder the financial burden of the games. This, however, should come as little surprise in a 3rd c. A.C. context, a time when the cities of the Empire were hard-pressed to find decurions willing to undertake liturgies and frequently had to share expensive duties among several individuals.

Koumanoudis (1970) lists a victory in the Pythian Games of Delphi and the Panhellenia of Athens (lines 6, 8–9). 1267

Libanios says as much for the Olympic Games at 4th c. A.C. Antioch (Orations 10.31–32): Kai; me;n dh; kajk tw'n ajqlhtw'n tou'to i[doi ti" a[n, o{tan tou;" me;n oJ kh'rux eijsavgh/ th'/ fwnh/', tou;" de; mh; th'/ siwph'/, th'" peri; aujtou;" basavnou touvtwn eJkavteron poiouvsh". kaivtoi pleivou" a]n h\san oujk ou[sh" ejxetavsew", ajllæ h\n a]n meta; tou' beltivono" to; cei'ron: ejgevnetæ ou\n tou[latton tou' pleiv o no" a[ m einon. tau' t a eij d ov t e" ∆Hlei' o i megalofronou'si tw'/ movli" eJpta; paræ aujtoi'" ajpoduvesqai. toiou'ton dev ti kai; to; tw'n Delfw'n. paræ a[lloi" dev ge aj q lhtw' n aj g ev l ai deutev r a" hJ m ev r a" eij " to; n aj g w' n a deovmenai, tou[noma mevntoi ge oujk i[son, oujdæ ejstin ou{tw" ajnaidh;" oujdeiv", o{sti" a]n tou;" ajqlhta;" ajntariqmw'n ajxiwvsai a]n pro; ejkeivnwn tetavcqai tw'n toi'" ojlivgoi" crwmevnwn.

The athletes' catalogue is useful for the present study because it is completely preserved and thus permits some general observations about Thessalonike's games, as well as direct comparison with athletic events known at Delphi. In the first place, it is notable that not one of the athletes victorious at the fourth Pythiad of Thessalonike is otherwise attested at Roman Delphi or Olympia; nor does any one of them figure in Luigi Moretti's anthology of agonistic inscriptions from all over the Greek world.1265 This is not to say that only second-rate athletes competed at Thessalonike, since the other inscriptions attesting these games are catalogues that also list prestigious victories at first-rank festivals elsewhere.1266 On the

1268

Aurelius Eutychos from Adramyttion in Mysia won the youths' stadion-race, the youths' pentathlon, and the men's pentathlon, thus proving, at least for Thessalonike, that a contestant was not prevented from trying his luck in a more senior age category, though presumably the reverse was not permitted. More typical is the case of M. Aurelius Zosimianos of Thebes, also an honourary citizen of Athens, who was clearly a gifted runner and consequently won the stadion-race and two-stade diaulos.

1270 1263

Robert (1938), 60–61 arrived independently at the same conclusion.

Moretti (1957), passim.

1271

We have on this count the testimony of Libanios once again. In speaking of the current state of the Olympic Games at Antioch, he criticizes the magistrate Argyrios for pandering to the tastes of the urban mob and reducing the festival to its lowest common denominator. In the old days, the audience for this festival had beeen small and discriminating (Oration 10.):

1264 Duties of epimeletes: Chapter II, pages 55 ff. Grammateus at Delphi: Chapter II, page 72. 1265

Line 25: "pavlhn: oujdeiv"."

1269

Moretti (1953).

1266

IG VII.49 (=Moretti [1953], #88) lists victories at Olympia, Delphi, Isthmia, Argos, Athens, Nikopolis, and several other cities in Achaea and Asia provinces. The newer, Thessalonike catalogue of

e{drai te livqou duvo, tou' ejdavfou" oJpovson th'" prwvth" plhsivon: oujde;n ga;r e[dei pleivono", ouj pollou' ge tou' eijsiovnto" o[nto". ou[te gavr oijkevth" ou[te e[ti foitw'n nevo"

198

Chapter VI Pythian coins of Perinthos

Severus had troops stationed at Perinthos, and he even stayed there himself to wage war against fellowclaimant Pescennius Niger at Byzantion.1274 Severus later pursued Niger to a decisive battle at Issos in A.D. 194, and continued east into Mesopotamia on a punitive expedition before returning to Europe. Perinthos received its first neokorate title from the emperor in early A.D. 196 when Severus, having at length had Byzantion reduced and demoted to the status of a kome in the territory of Perinthos, returned to Perinthos and dedicated the temple he had vowed on his previous, outbound visit.1275 This triumphant adventus of the emperor was the occasion for the epinician Severeia games and a coinage to commemorate them.1276

Table 6.3: Coinage of Roman Perinthos All Types

Emperor

Obv. Rev. Dies Dies

Pythian Types

Total Specimens

Obv. Dies

Rev. Dies

All Types

Pythian Types

Septimius Severus (193–211)

37 (37)

80 (105)

4 (4)

13 (18)

147

23

Caracalla (198–217)

16 (16)

79 (93)

4 (4)

11 (12)

171

32

Geta1272 (198–212)

19 (20)

37 (52)

9 (11)

11 (15)

64

19

Elagabalus

31 (35)

48 (77)

4 (–)

4 (–)

75

4

19 (19)

54 (71)

4 (4)

5 (5)

101

15

26 (26)

60 (71)

2 (2)

3 (3)

128

7

(218–222) Severus Alexander

(222–235) Gordian III (238–244)

If one disregards the routine iconography of a prize table laden with crowns, palm branches, etc., it is the neokoracy of Perinthos that merits pride of place on several of its Pythian Games coins minted between the reigns of Severus and Gordian III, the whole period of issue for such coins, which necessarily corroborates the postulated connection between the emperor and the games. The coins that commemorate Perinthos's favoured status as host of the imperial cult all measure an ostentatious 37–42mm across and were struck from no more than three different obverse and three different reverse dies per reign. The first of these commemoratives were minted for the co-emperors Severus (Type 1), Caracalla (Type 1), and Geta (Type 1) between 209 and A.D. 211. Although reverse dies were not shared between the obverses of father and sons, all reverses have the same type of two temple facades, above each one of which is set a victor's crown; the nearby field legends, A K T I A PUQIA, identify the games for which they stood.1277 There is no second grant of neokoracy attested before Elagabalus that would explain the Aktian crown and second temple, unless one is willing to posit that Severus made such a grant, Caracalla revoked it, and Elagabalus reinstated it.1278 The same type of two

The use of Pythian Games types at Thessalonike was unusual for its prevalence and integration into the rest of the city's issues. Even at Perinthos, another prolific minting centre of the period, Table 6.3 shows how the Pythian issues were more sporadic and of limited volume. The Thracian coast city of Perinthos also lay along the Via Egnatia and was thus a convenient staging point, not to mention the home port to the k l a v s s h Perinqiva.1273 In the course of A.D. 193 to 194,

ou[qæ oi|" ajpo; ceirw'n oJ bivo" ou[qæ oi|" e[rgon to; mhde;n ejrgavzesqai. tricw'n te tw'n ejpi; th'" kefalh'" oi|" sfovdra e[melen, ei[rgontæ a]n ijscurai'" tai'" peri; ta;" quvra" fulakai'", h] ma; Diva ge oujde; proshv/esan, eijdovte" wJ" e[sti to; kwluvson. musthrivwn te timh;n ei\ce ta; ejn touvtw/' tw'/ plevqrw/, tosauvth me;n aijdw;" h\n h}n ajllhvlou" te kai; tou;" ajqlhta;" oiJ parovnte" h/jdou'nto, tosauvth de; hJsuciva, tosauvth de; siwphv: kai; ga;r ei[ti pavlaisma qauvmato" h\n a[xion, sigh'/ tou'to ejqaumavzeto, th'" boh'" de; e[dei tou;" qewmevnou" kratei'n, tou' skhvptrou parevconto" to;n fovbon. ijscurovteron de; kai; krei'tton tou'to rJa/divw" ejgivgneto tw'n ouj pollw'n, ouj polloi; de; h\san tw'/ mh; polu; to; decovmenon ei\nai, pollw'n de; oujde;n ejdei'to touti; tw' ∆Olumpivwn to; mevro", wJ'/ kovsmo" h\n aujto; tou'to, to; mh; pollw'n ei\nai. toiou'ton de; a[ra ti kai; to; tw'n teletw'n, ai|" oujk a]n sunacqesqeivh" ejlavttosin ajnti; pleiovnwn eJauta;" parecouvsa".

dedications to emperors and empresses between ca A.D. 100 and ca 300 may also be found in the Perinthine corpus (IGRR, 1.783–792). 1274

Cassius Dio [Xiph.] 75.3. Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Severus 8.13. CIL VI.1408. 1275

Demotion of Byzantion: Cassius Dio [Xiph.] 74.6.3, 74.14.3; Herodian 3.6.9. Temple at Perinthos: Birley (1971), 190; BMC Thrace 152, #33. 1276

See, for instance, a 28mm specimen to be found in BMC Thrace, 151, #32. 1277

These issues of Geta include one joint issue with his older brother, the senior emperor Caracalla.

Septimius Severus (six examples): Schönert-Geiss (1965), #518.1, 519.1–3; American Numismatic Society 67.152.225; and the 21–22nd October, 1966 Bank Leu–Münzen und Medaillen auction, lot 569. Caracalla (twenty-one examples): Schönert-Geiss (1965), #599.1–3, 600, 601, 614, 615.1–7, 615.9, 616, 617; SNG Copenhagen #746; American Numismatic Society 47.56.1; the 1904 Egger auction 46, lot 299; the 14–15th June, 1971 Stack's auction, lot 775; and the 1908 Hirsch auction 21 (Weber Collection), lot 931. Geta (one example): Schönert-Geiss (1965), #668.

1273

1278

One need hardly warn against the reliability of a biased source writing over a century later as a guide to the situation at Thessalonike. 1272

Tacitus mentions the visit of Germanicus to Perinthos in A.D. 18 (Annals 2.54). The klavssh Perinqiva is attested by only a single inscription of 88–90 A.D. (IGRR 1.781 =CIG 2022). A number of

For Elagabalus's grant of a second neokoracy to Perinthos, see note 1287 below. A fluctuation of civic fortune under successive emperors is not unheard-of: Tyre obtained the right to hold Aktian

199

Chapter VI

A.D. 198–209. More plentiful are slightly later coins in the names of Severus and his sons that record the more prestigious grant of Aktian Games alongside the Pythian Games (A.D. 209–211).1285 The Aktian Games of Perinthos continued to be associated with the Pythian Games on the city's coinage until the reign of Gordian III. Ironically, another imperially initiated festival called the Philadelphia is recorded on certain 34mm and larger coins between A.D. 207 and Geta's assassination in A.D. 212.1286 Coins of these larger denominations appear, from the number of dies used and specimens extant, to have been commoner than lower denominations with similar types. Die studies show that each obverse die struck with one or several reverses, but that the sharing of reverses between different obverses was relatively infrequent. The high ratio of reverse to obverse dies among the higher denominations is interesting. Perhaps the very wide dies were especially liable to break, or possibly quality control was especially rigorous for such showy coins. Variety of type was not at any rate the object, because all Pythian reverse dies striking with a given obverse die were of the same type; and frequently two different obverses dies also struck with reverses of the same type. Overall, the Pythian Games coins made up a small proportion of Perinthos's total coinage at this time. In the whole coinage in Severus's name (37 obverse and 80 reverse dies) only four obverse and 13 reverse dies refer to PUQIA, and they occur in the denominations characterized by Schönert-Geiss as the Medaillon (39–40mm) and the 4-assarion piece (27–29mm).

temples and two crowns later occurs without modification on a single extant coin of Elagabalus.1279 Among the final manifestations of Perinthos's Pythian Games coins, the types used by both Severus Alexander (Type 1) and Gordian III (Type 1) on their largest denomination are of especial interest. In the first instance, one sees the Tyche of Perinthos standing, holding in her left hand a cornucopia, but a small temple in her right; below, to her left, are a victor's crown, a purse, and the word AKTI⁄A; below, to her right, are another crown, a heap of five apples, and the word PUQ⁄IA.1280 The identification of the crown games by the labels is clear enough, as is the integration of the games with the neokoracy and Perinthos's civic identity. But it is the crowns' attributes that are remarkable, for they indicate that cash prizes were awarded at the local Aktian Games, but not at the Pythian Games. Louis Robert has shown that the ball-like objects frequently depicted on Pythian Games coins of this period were in fact apples, which were traditionally awarded to Pythian victors in addition to the traditional laurel wreath.1281 The presence of a coin purse next to the Aktian crown is not only in marked contrast to the Pythian apples of negligible intrinsic value but also implies that the new Pythian Games continued Delphi's model of nonremunerative prizes.1282 Much the same type is reemployed under Gordian III, the only difference being that the Tyche of Perinthos carries a second temple, not a cornucopia, in her left hand.1283 The Pythian Games of Perinthos date from A.D. 207 and receive mention, by themselves, on only a few coins of Severus (one pair of dies) and of Geta (two obverse and one reverse dies).1284 The obverse die of the single Severan specimen also struck reverses used after A.D. 207, whereas the Getan examples might have been struck at any point during his Caesarship of

Caracalla's coinage is similar in volume and Pythian content: out of a total of 16 obverses and 79 reverses, four and 11 respectively are Pythian; the denominations are Medaillon (40–43mm), the 6assarion (34–35mm), and the 4-assarion pieces (27mm). The coinage of Geta from Perinthos has a comparable number of obverse dies (19), but fewer than half the number of reverse dies (37). The proportion of Pythian coins is higher with nine obverse dies used in conjunction with 11 explicitly Pythian reverse dies, which are used for the Medaillon (37–40mm), the 6assarion (35–36mm), the 4-assarion (29mm), and the 1-assarion pieces (18mm). But at the same time there are fewer extant Pythian coins for Geta (19, including seven from a joint issue with Caracalla) than for either Severus (21) or Caracalla alone (32).

Games from Caracalla, lost it under Elagabalus, then regained it under Severus Alexander (Harl [1987], 68; see page 211 below). 1279

Schönert-Geiss (1965), #714.

1280

Schönert-Geiss (1965), #784.1, 3–7, 784.2; the 10–11th June, 1970 Stack's auction, lot 212; the 1913 Zsch. & K. auction of the Helbina Collection, lot 234; and the 1935 Schlesinger auction 13 of the Hermitage Collection, lot 486. All of these examples were struck from the same pair of dies.

1281

Robert (1949b). See page 181 above.

1282

The purse occurs once before this on a single Pythian Games coin of Perinthos, a coin of Elagabalus Type 3 (28mm): atop a table sits a purse between two crowns, each one with a palm branch inside it; below the table are a stack of five apples and an amphora ; above and below the reverse type are the words PUQIA ⁄ AKTIA (Schönert-Geiss [1965], #679). Although the Elagabalan coin does not, by itself, specify the allocation of attributes, one might fairly argue, on the analogy of the later coins, that the apples stand for the Pythian Games and the purse for the Aktian Games.

1283

Perinthos continued to win favour under the boyemperor Elagabalus, who granted the city its second neokorate.1287 The occasion for this may have been a visit by the new emperor on his way to Rome in the

Schönert-Geiss (1965), #861.1–3.

1284

Severus: J4/505. Geta Caesar: B1 and C1/637+638. The identification of Perinthine die identities is owed to Schönert-Geiss (1965), as are all general assertions in the following discussion about the characteristics of Perinthine coinage as a whole.

200

1285

Harl (1987), 68 n.138.

1286

Geta Types 1–2.

1287

This is made explicit by the coin BMC Thrace, 155, #53.

Chapter VI spring of A.D. 219. In the previous year he had sailed from Antioch to winter quarters at Nikomedia, and his westward travels thence, whether by land or sea, naturally brought him past Perinthos. One issue of 6assarion coins (33–34mm) both names the second neokorate of Perinthos and represents the emperor's adventus by sea.1288 The volume of his Pythian issues is much smaller than in the previous reign since only four specimens from four different pairs of dies are known, but the same denominations of the Medaillon (39–40mm), the 6-assarion (33–34mm), and the 4assarion pieces (27–29mm) are continued. The sharing of reverse dies may only be characterized as common among coins of the largest size.

Moesia do suggest the presence of the emperor with his army.1292 Pythian coins of Philippopolis The city of Philippopolis in Thrace (Roman Trimontium) affords the rare opportunity to associate securely a Pythian Games coinage with a specific event, an imperial a d v e n t u s , and thus merits consideration. Located inland on the Hebros river, Philippopolis was the centre of the Thracian koinon, capital of the Thracian province, and also a convenient halt on the main road from Dalmatia to the Bosporus. Its importance and good location made Caracalla's visit in A.D. 214 almost inevitable.1293 His journey originated in the military camps on the Danubian frontier of Moesia and proceeded thence into Thrace and Asia to fight the Parthians. At this time, Herodian writes, Caracalla identified himself closely with Alexander and hoped to emulate his conquests.1294 Consequently, the new Pythian Games recorded on the coins of Philippopolis are named Alexandreia in his honour.

Although the Pythian coins played a relatively minor role in the Elagabalan emission, it is possible that they were struck on the occasion of the emperor's visit owing to a common solar connection between Apollo and El-Gabal.1289 Elagabalus's interest in Pythian Games is clear from his introduction of the Antoninia Pythia to Rome soon afterwards.1290 The same three denominations continue to feature Pythian types under Severus Alexander; and the overall volume of Perinthine coinage is comparable to the previous reign's. Only the Medaillon denomination of 39mm is represented by more than one or two specimens. The Medaillon obverses are also the only ones to share reverses, even though the overall ratio of reverse to obverse dies for the whole reign (54 to 19) is higher than under Elagabalus. This might suggest that the output of most denominations lasted some time and may not have been limited to a single occasion. On the other hand, neighbouring cities' coins that allude to the adventus of Severus Alexander and his army on their way to face the Sassanid threat in Syria in A.D. 231 might, by analogy, date all the Pythian Games coins of Perinthos, whose seventh Pythiad would have fallen in that year.1291

Despite a brief period of issue ending by A.D. 222, Philippopolis had already featured some of the most unusual reverse types in the whole series of Pythian Games coinages on its Caracallan issues. Recourse was had to the standard types of an inscribed victor's crown, a laden table, and a neokorate temple for the less spectacular issues under Elagabalus. The representations of athletes and gods are especially notable among the Caracallan examples, which were likely inspired by statues in public view in that city.1295 The most widely-attested type is a diskobolos, who appears on medallic bronzes about 40mm in diametre (Type 1);1296 and one other coin of the same size depicts what is apparently a judge or referee of the games.1297 On other coins of both similarly large and of 1292

BMC Thrace 16, #12 and 38, #80 respectively. The same meaning might be drawn from some large bronzes of Anchialos and Perinthos in Thrace (36 and 40mm respectively) that represent Herakles wrestling the Cretan Bull or shooting the Stymphalian Birds (BMC Thrace 86, #19 and 236, #62a).

The number of Pythian coins struck under Gordian III at Perinthos, seven in all, is sparser yet. The Pythian coins were a decidedly minor part of the city's significant output, which is represented by 26 obverse and 60 reverse dies from that reign. One is tempted to associate at least some of this activity with the march in A.D. 242 of the emperor and his army to the Balkan frontier to defeat the invading Carpi turning east to eject the king Sapor from Syria. Coins of contemporary Viminacium and Markianopolis in 1288

1293

The imperial adventus is clearly depicted on some specimens (e.g. Cahn auction 71, lot 739). Herodian 4.8.1. Tacchella (1902).

1295

Kolev (1991).

1296

SNG Copenhagen #780; American Numismatic Society 47.56.3; 16–18th May, 1984 Bank Leu and Numismatic Fine Arts auction of the Garrett Collection, volume 1, lot 843; 15–16th October, 1948 Bullowa auction, lot 963 (the same die pair for these four coins); BMC Thrace, 165, #36. Though by no means common, this type is well known to North American dealers in ancient coins and is surely represented by more than just these five examples.

BMC Thrace 156, #56.

1289

The solar nature of the Syrian god Elagabal is quite clear from numerous silver and bronze coins issued from Rome that depict the boy-emperor sacrificing over an altar and bear the accompanying inscription SACERD. DEI SOLIS ELAGAB. (e.g. BM Coins, Rom. Emp. V, #225, 359) 1290

1294

1297

American Numismatic Society 71.193.2: a half-nude man clad in a chiton stands to the left and holds a long rod in his right hand. There also exist reverse types of victorious athletes holding palm branches and wreaths (Types 9 and 10, 29–30mm): 21–22nd October, 1966 Bank Leu –Münzen und Medaillen auction of the Niggeler Collection, lot 571; and 18–19th May, 1973 Rauch auction 12, lot 107 respectively.

Robert (1970), 23–24.

1291

See, for example a certain 38mm coin of Byzantion (BMC Thrace, 104, #92).

201

Chapter VI

Pythian coins of Aphrodisias

smaller sizes, one encounters the gods Zeus, Hermes, Asklepios, Athena, and Herakles in addition to the expected Apollo.1298 One type explicitly connects these games with Caracalla's expectations of military success, since the emperor is shown holding a statuette of Victory.1299

The Pythian coinage of Aphrodisias in Caria is a more extreme example of what happened at Philippopolis: a single denomination (27–30mm) and type were struck on one occasion in the reign of Gallienus. The only outliers to this compact group are three specimens of a slightly earlier, semi–autonomous type with a Hiera Synkletos obverse type whose reverse die (R451) was later reused with a Gallienic obverse (O262).1305 Within the main group there are 10 obverse and 14 reverse dies that struck a total of 38 extant specimens. In all cases the reverse type was the same: a lion–footed table, sometimes inscribed O I K O U M E N I K O S , atop which sit two crowns inscribed KAPET(wvlia) (GORDIA(neiva) on one die) and PUQIA.

The Pythian issues fall into three clear denominations, 29–31mm (two, or perhaps three, obverse and nine reverse dies), 36mm (one obverse and three reverse dies), and 40–42mm (seven obverse and eight reverse dies) in diametre. One obverse die of the largest size perpetuates Caracalla's Alexandrian conceit with a heroically bare-shouldered bust of the emperor.1300 One is reminded of the gold medallion from Aboukir and the statues of Alexander that Caracalla is said to have set up for the edification of the locals.1301 Over two dozen known specimens exist to commemorate the Alexandreia Pythia of Philippopolis, which is more than the number of Pythian coins extant from most cities.1302 Coins of Ankyra attest the same process a few months later when Caracalla elevated the local Asklepeia games at Ankyra to iso-Pythian status.1303 The work of Philippopolis as a staging post along the Danubian frontier was later rewarded by Philip I's grant of colonia status in A.D. 248; but frontier service to the Empire had its risks too, as the sack and temporary Gothic occupation of the city in A.D. 251 was to show.1304

Agonistic types, including games named after emperors or the famous Capitolian games at Rome, were not especially rare at Aphrodisias and may have resulted from frequent imperial visits or victories by the likes of Commodus, Severus, Caracalla, Geta, Macrinus, Elagabalus, Gordian III, Trajan Decius, and Gallienus.1306 In the case of the semi-autonomous outliers, the signature of Stratoneikos clinches a date in the reign of Trajan Decius (A.D. 249–251). The occasion for epinician games was most plausibly Decius's great victory over the Goths early in the campaign of A.D. 251, which was soon overshadowed by his death and his army's annihilation in a Gothic ambush that June. Possibly the Aphrodisians had already seen to the organization of victory games and the striking of some Pythian coins that summer before news of the disaster reached them and the first trickle of coinage could be suspended.

1298

Zeus (Type 8, 29mm): 1922 Spink auction of the Sir Hermann Weber Collection, lot 2772. Hermes (Type 7, 31mm): American Numismatic Society 1944.100.16437; BMC Thrace, 166, #40, 41 (each of the three struck with a different reverse die). Asklepios (Type 12, 30mm): Kolev (1991), 518, pl. 3.9. Athena (Type 4, 40mm): 1935 Schlesinger auction 13, the Hermitage Collection, lot 489. Herakles (Types 3 and 3a, 41–42mm): American Numismatic Society 1944.100.16436; and SNG Copenhagen #784, respectively. Apollo (Type 2a, 40–41mm): Gerassimov (1936), 126; Kolev (1991), 512, pl. 1.6. 1299

Type 5, 41mm: October, 1931 Cahn auction 71, lot 739.

1300

American Numismatic Society 47.56.3 and 71.193.2.

It is interesting to see the reuse of the Decian reverse die along with others of precisely the same type in striking coins for Gallienus some years later. Since Gallienus busied himself with the western frontiers of the Empire prior to Valerian's capture by the Persians in A.D. 260, the Pythian Games commemorated on Aphrodisian coins may have been first celebrated before Gallienus became sole emperor in A.D. 260. The obverse dies of Gallienus were also coupled with a number of reverse types, such as a neokorate temple, prize crowns atop a table, the emperor on horseback riding down his foes, and the emperor in a triumphal quadriga (types 222–226). All these coins were undoubtedly issued together with the intention of praising some great accomplishment of Gallienus. These were to be the final allusions to the local Pythian

1301

Gold medallion: Walters Art Gallery 59.1. For the statues of Alexander, see Herodian 4.8.1.

1302

More Pythian coins were minted in A.D. 218 when the city received its first neokorate from Elagabalus. The temple given over to the imperial cult was of the local Apollo Kendrisos, and coins of the second Pythiad accordingly name it the Pythia Kendreseia (Gerassimov [1950], 312, #250; American Numismatic Society collection, number 1944.100.16439; Numismatik Lanz sale 68, lot 602). Two denominations of 35–36mm and 22mm were minted, but only eight examples are known. Data are scarce, but apparently each of the four issues had its own particular obverse and reverse dies.

1303

Harl (1987), 65–66.

1304

Jordannes 18.102–103. Ammianus Marcellinus 18.103. Dexippos, fr. 16 in FHG 3.676. Danoff (1937), cols. 2250–2251. Compare Mitchell (1990), 192:

1305

The identification and designation of Aphrodisian die identities is owed to Macdonald (1992).

Communities close to the front line, therefore, at least acquired prestige [in the form of iJeroi; kai; stefani'tai ajgw'ne"] to compensate for the strains and damage which the war effort imposed on them.

1306

Macdonald (1992), 26, 32–33. By way of comparison, B.V. Head believed that the inscription EPINIKION on the reverse of certain coins of L. Verus signed by T. Cl. Zelos alluded to Pythian Games celebrated in connection with his eastern victory (BMC Caria, xxv).

The Gothic threat of the mid 3rd c. A.C. was also the occasion for Thessalonike's new set of city walls (Misdrachi-Kapon [1986], 51).

202

Chapter VI Games, or to any other festivals, on Aphrodisias's coinage, which ceased utterly in the 270s A.C.

events. The dedication of a coinage by men like Aristotimos at Delphi suggests the possibility that furnishing a small supply of commemorative coinage was part of the liturgy a civic benefactor undertook.1311 The most obvious candidate to pay for the games was the agonothetes, but the details of finance surely varied widely from place to place.

The epigraphic record confirms that the Pythian Games of Aphrodisias were indeed founded in the 250s A.C. at the behest of Valerian, Gallienus's father and co-emperor. The occasion was most likely Valerian's creation of a new province, Caria-Phrygia, and the designation of Aphrodisias as its capital:1307 two Aphrodisian inscriptions dating to about the same time do mention the imperial grant (dwreav) of a iJero;" ajgwvn to the city, which was very likely identical with the Pythian Games that appeared on Gallienus's coins.1308

On the other hand, the greater volumes and more complex die-histories of Pythian coinages from the Balkan mints of Thessalonike, Perinthos, and Philippopolis bespeak a different motivation than euergetism. Surely here was money coined when armed forces were in the vicinity, which might well have coincided with games to honour a recent victory or military initiative. Although exact circumstances surrounding these Balkan mintages has yet to be elucidated, parallel instances in 3rd c. A.C. Asia Minor are generally agreed by the scholars to have occurred when, or just before, large numbers of troops were encamped in the vicinity.1312 In his study of the coinages of east Cilicia and their context, Ruprecht Ziegler has established a close connection between the

General characteristics of the coinages A quick look at the list of the new Pythian Games coinages will show that most of the cities not already discussed struck only very few such coins, at least as represented by the combined holdings of all the major world collections. Most of these cities were located in Asia Minor, not the more militarized Balkan provinces; and their Pythian Games issues are frequently attested by no more than one or two specimens each. It is a safe supposition that in such cases Pythian Games issues were not a significant proportion of the local coinage pool. Thus it is unlikely that a city specially struck such types as a means of covering the often considerable expenses of staging Pythian Games through the high intrinsic value at which foreign visitors lured to the games would be compelled to purchase local coinage.1309 We do know of certain instances when coins were counterstamped, possibly on the occasion of games, but the purpose remains unclear.1310 There is no reason not to suppose that Pythian coinages were struck to commemorate the games, but the time-honoured mechanism of euergetism must be held accountable for funding such

See Chapter II, page 55.

1312

For one interpretation, see Mitchell (1993), 255: Another clear reason for heavy third-century minting is that issues often coincided with the presence of Roman forces in a region, a phenomenon which can be traced with great precision in the cities of Cilicia and Pontus, where the coins are precisely dated [Ziegler (1985), 130–143]. It is unlikely that local bronze was issued to soldiers directly as pay, but cities, alerted to troop movements by imperial edicts which prepared the ground for campaigns a year or more ahead of their arrival, ensured that enough local money was in circulation to meet the extra needs of billeted or over-wintering soldiers.

Howgego (1985), 29 concurs (cf. Nollé [1987], 260): It is likely, however, that the army elicited coinages not as pay but simply by its presence. The army on the move would have created temporary increases in the level of trade and demand for coin en route. Coinages may have been struck to meet this need.... Bosch [AA 1931, 427] has shown that military types and coins of Asia Minor were concentrated on the military routes from Bithynia to Cilicia. Again this is not evidence that the coins were struck to pay the army, but is illustrative of the economic influence of the army to the cities with which it came into contact.

1307

Roueché (1981), 113–115, #7–8 (=MAMA VIII.508 and CIG 2082); cf. SEG 31.910. 1308

1311

Roueché (1981), 117–120.

1309

The reason for one well-known devaluation of currency at Side in ca A.D. 260 is still debated. Nollé (1990), 248 argues that it was done for the convenience of the Roman troops then sheltering in Side, so that they would receive more local coins for their pay in antoniniani. More cogent is the argument of Kromann (1989), 154–155 that countermarking the older coins with an E (=5 assaria) was a simple way of producing small change to complement the new 10–assarion pieces introduced by Gallienus ca A.D. 263.

Anne Kromann and Johannes Nollé have come to somewhat different conclusions about the function of bronze coins of mid 3rd c. A.C. Side, which was then a venue of Pythian Games (see page 206 below), coins that are almost unique in the Empire for bearing explicit marks of denomination in assaria. Many Sidetan coins of Valerian (A.D. 253–260) were counterstamped with a higher value in about 260 A.D., the year of Rome's defeat and the capture of Valerian by the Sassanids. Kromann (1989) emphasizes the importance of Side's coinage in the 250s A.C. for the economic needs of the military in the area: the later, higher values countermarked onto the earlier coins were intended to ensure a stable supply of currency in the crucial years of the late 250s and early 260s A.C. In addition, hoards indicate that Pamphylian, Pisidian, and W. Cilician bronzes all circulated together. Nollé (1990) argues that the countermarking of Side coins with new, higher values in the mid 3rd c. A.C. was a result of intensified trade, not of economic collapse. One important economic factor was the presence of Roman troops in the area, especially after the Persian invasion of A.D. 260.

1310

One possible instance is the countermark of an A within a wreath that was applied at Aphrodisias ca A.D. 249–251 to coins of that city and Heraklea Salbake, Lydian Tripolis, Phrygian Hierapolis, Laodikea, and Kibyra (Howgego [1985], 237–238, #667). Although no Aktian Games have yet been attested for Aphrodisias, the identical iconography of Aktian Games coins from Nikopolis makes this a definite possibility. In addition, the low number of specimens bearing this countermark (seven listed by Howgego) is in keeping with the generally small amounts of surviving coins that this study has shown commemorate Pythian Games. Interestingly enough, two 3rd c. A.C. authors attest the special minting of local coinage at times of festival: Dio Cassius 52.30.3 and Herodian 8.3.3–6 (cf. MacMullen [1981], 26 n.37).

203

Chapter VI

above were each distinct, and they seem to have been scheduled so that Ephesos hosted at least one major festival each year.1319 This also means that the Ephesian coins of Elagabalus were not necessarily minted on the occasion of the local Pythian Games, as opposed to the Ephesea, the Hadrianeia, or the Olympic Games. As the reverse field legends indicate, both coins were struck at a time when the Ephesians were in proud possession of a fourth neokorate title, "...The only ones of all (to do so)." The coincidence in timing between the inauguration of the Pythian Games and the granting of the fourth neokorate title by Elagabalus is rendered suggestively close by the employment of the same obverse, portrait die for one of the Pythian Games coins and another coin minted on the occasion of the new neokorate grant.1320 Since the neokoracy involved the construction of a new temple and, with it, the instigation of a new cult and worship, one may reasonably conjecture that this was the occasion for the foundation of Pythian Games at Ephesos. The other festivals, the Ephesea, the Hadrianeia, and the Olympic Games all pre-existed the reign of Elagabalus, which leaves the Pythian Games as the only new foundation among these major festivals.1321

establishment of new iJeroi; kai; stefani'tai ajgw'ne" in the 3rd c. A.C. and contemporary imperial politics, either in connection with a recent grant of neokorate status as provincial centre for the latest manifestation of the imperial cult, or as thanks for billeting the army, or out of gratitude for prompt recognition of the current (usurper) emperor.1313 Organization of Pythian Games at Ephesos The numismatic evidence for Pythian Games at Ephesos is exceedingly meagre: it consists of at least one, but probably two, coins of Elagabalus.1314 Both exemplars are large (35mm) and bear very similar reverse types, which, though stereotyped, are informative. The one sure coin shows three basketshaped prize crowns inscribed EFESHA, A(drianav/nha), and P(uvqia), as well as a wreath inscribed O(l)U(mpiva) within, sitting atop a large table, whose edge bears the inscription O I K O U M E N I K O S AGWN;1315 below the table stand an amphora and two palm branches;1316 and the legend in the field around the device reads EFESIWN MONWN ⁄ APASWN ⁄ TETRAKI NEW⁄KORWN.1317 Despite the apparent indication of the table-edge inscription, the Ephesea, Hadrianeia, Pythia, and Olympia were not all celebrated at once as a single agon.1318 The epigraphic evidence proves that the four festivals mentioned 1313

1319

The Ephesea are indicated as either biennial or annual in an inscription of the late 2nd c. A.C. that mentions two victories by a kitharode within the 517th penteteric cycle (IEphesos 4.1106; cf. IEphesos 4.1105, 1106A, and 1132 for other victors at the Ephesea). Once every four years, a more elaborate mevgala ∆Efeshva was held (Moretti [1953], #73). A victory in the Ephesea was a matter of distinction locally, as is shown by the career of a later 2nd c. A.C. Ephesian pentathlete who returned home after his sporting days were over to preside as "...Panegyriarch of the proagon of the great Ephesea," the first and only Epheseonikes to do so (IEphesos 5.2072 [=Moretti (1953), #75]). Thucydides knew of a festival called the Ephesea (3.104.3), but we cannot tell if it continued without interruption into the Roman Imperial period, or if a Classical institution may have been revived in the 2nd c. A.C. For an overview of all the texts pertaining to the Hadrianeia and Olympic Games of Ephesos, see Lämmer (1967). The Hadrianeia of Ephesos (e.g. IEphesos 4.1153) had the same quadrennial frequency of the Hadrianeia founded at Athens as a iJero;" kai; stefanivth" ajgwvn (Follet [1976], 348–349), a periodicity that was standard for Roman foundations of the first rank. The same frequency of course held true for the Olympic Games of Ephesos (e.g. IEphesos 4.1133; J. and L. Robert, [1961], 539), which imitated their Greek original in many other respects also (SEG 34.1093; SEG 26.1266; J. and L. Robert [1977], 418 n.4; J. and L. Robert [1974], 498, 506; Robert [1967], 40–44).

Mitchell (1990), 192. Ziegler (1985), 130–143.

1314

SNG von Aulock 1905 and SNG Copenhagen 22.443 respectively. The absence of any other specimens in both the principal published collections and in the photographic archive of the American Numismatic Society in New York suggests that the relative volume of mintage must have been low. 1315

Both the wear on the table-edge portion of the reverse of SNG von Aulock 1905 and the quality of the published photograph have not allowed me to decide whether this reading is correct.

1316

Competitors, particularly those in the heavy, combatative events, drew lots from amphorae to determine matchings in the round-robin system of elimination that led to the final match-up (Lucian, Hermotimos 40). For an overview of amphorae in agonistic coin types, see Gaebler (1929). Athens and Delphi were the apparent progenitor of this standard iconography of agonistic festivals in the late 2nd and the 3rd c. A.C. Some issues of early 2nd c. A.C. Athens that lack an imperial portrait feature a table on their reverses (SNG Copenhagen 3.364–366). At about the same time, or a little later, one of the most commonly-encountered coins of Roman Delphi is an issue in honour of the deified Faustina I (A.D. 141) with the reverse type of a large table supporting a wreath, amphora, a heap of apples (an further prize awarded to Pythian victors, Robert [1949b]) and a crow, the sacred bird of Apollo. Coinages struck in connection with the Olympic and the Isthmian Games between the mid 1st c. and early 3rd c. A.C. were less symbolically encumbered, consisting only of the festival's name enclosed within a wreath of the appropriate sort. It was not until the early years of the 3rd c. A.C. that the agonistic table next found its way onto the reverses of local coinages elsewhere, namely at Ankyra, Hierapolis, Pergamon, and Perinthos.

1320

The obverse die of SNG von Aulock 1905 is identical with that of SNG Copenhagen 22.442, both of which have the same reverse field legend. The latter coin, however, has as its type the front facades of four temples with a cult image visible inside each. Another Elagabalan coin from Ephesos in Oxford's Ashmolean Museum (Sear [1982], 290, #3060) was apparently minted a year or two later, when excitement over the fourth neokorate grant had died down somewhat (EFESIWN ⁄ D NEW⁄KORWN) and it was the turn for the Hadriana/-nea, designated as A(drianav/-nha), to be celebrated.

1317

Where SNG Copenhagen 22.443 differs in its reverse design is that one of the prize crowns is too effaced to allow one to see if it was inscribed P(uvqia), that the table-edge inscription is OIKOUMENIKOI, that there is no amphora under the table, and that the field legend is slightly different, EFESIWN MO⁄NWN A⁄PASWN ⁄ D ⁄ NEOKORW⁄N 1318

1321

The Olympic Games of Ephesos were first founded in Domitian's honour and were resumed by Hadrian (Friesen [1993], 117–119, 139–141). The Hadrianea, as the name suggests, obviously began as a commemoration of the emperor Hadrian. For the Ephesea, see note 1319 above.

Robert (1949a), 84–85.

204

Chapter VI

Puqiavdi "æ meta; th;n ªajºnanevwsin."1326 Whereas the Greek term ‘Pythiad’ never meant ‘a four-year term between two Pythian Games’ but instead denoted ‘the celebration of a Pythian Games’, the use of that term does suggest an attempt to model it after the Delphic original.1327 Other traces of this mimicry are obvious from the events and administration of the Ephesian version.

When one considers the epigraphic evidence alongside the coins, one becomes convinced that the Pythian Games were a quadrennial festival of considerable prestige, which is in direct contradiction to the verdict of Louis Robert, that they were annual and only a modest affair.1322 His opinion rests upon the interpretation of the words "fifth term as agonothetes" (ajgwnoqesiva eæ) at line 17 of the following inscription engraved upon a marble kioniskos discovered at Ephesos:1323

5

10

15

As regards Robert's allegation of merely parochial appeal, there is the mention of Ephesos's Pythian Games on a stele erected at the Isthmian sanctuary. The Isthmian document takes the form of a pedimented stele of careful execution whose surviving portion bears relief representations of eight prize wreaths. Within each wreath is inscribed the name of a festival at which the unknown athlete was successful, which includes two victories at the Pythian Games of Ephesos.1328 Although the contests at Ephesos, Smyrna, and Pergamon hierarchically take second place to the very prestigious, quadrennial contests at Olympia, Rome, Neapolis, and Nikopolis, they are proudly included, and not at the very bottom of the list either. Thus, whereas the Ephesian games were never among the top rank, they clearly attracted contestants of top calibre.1329

ªAujtokravtoro" Kaivsaro" G. ∆Ioul.º O·ujhvrou Maximiv‚nou Sebastoªu'º kaªi; uiJºou' aujtou' Kaivsaro" G. ∆Ioul. M·aximivn‚ou Sebastou' ∆Epineivkia. Aujªr. Bºasileva Ked≥a≥c≥ou ∆Efevsion nªeikhvºsanta ejndovxw" ta; megavla Puvqia ejn ∆Efevsw/. Mªavrioº" Septivmio" Marivwn oJ ªfiloºseb(asto") grammateu;" dhvmou ªkai; ajgwºnoqevth" dia; aijw'no" kai; ªMavriºo" Septivmio" Mariano;" ªejk fºusewmavtwn ajgwnoqevth" ªdia; aijºw'no" tw'n megavlwãnà Puqivwãnà th;n teimh;n ajnevsthsãanÃ: ajnqupateuvonto" ªOujºavlerivou Messavla: ajgwnoqesiva eæ. ªNºeikhvsa" de; kai; ejn ÔUpaivpoi" ∆Artemªivºsia ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º

On the other hand, the production of Pythian Games at Ephesos obviously diverged somewhat from the practice at Delphi and other venues such as Thessalonike, since the Ionian version apparently lacked an Amphiktyony and epimeletes to oversee it. Instead, the Ephesian games were put on by two agonothetai, a father and son team, with unlimited terms (diæ aijw'no"). Indeed, the Pythian Games of Ephesos in the 3rd c. A.C. were a restoration of an earlier festival there of the same name, as indicated by the phrase meta; th;n ajnanevwsin on some inscriptions, and owed their existence largely, if not exclusively, to the patronage of Marius Septimius Marion. The role of

The inscription is conveniently dated between A.D. 235 and 238 by the mention of the co-emperors Maximinus I (Thrax) and his son Maximinus II, which was anywhere from thirteen to twenty years after Ephesos received its fourth neokorate title and minted some coins mentioning Pythian Games. Louis Robert was apparently not aware of the coin SNG von Aulock 1905 whose reverse type includes a prize crown inscribed P(uvqia);1324 but, had he been, he might have argued that the P stood for some other word, though such a hypothesis would be counter-intuitive in view of inscriptions explicitly attesting Pythian Games at Ephesos. Robert thus chose to interpret the term ajgwnoqesiva eæ as meaning the fifth, one-year term of office as agonothetes of these games, which would bring their foundation back to the early 230s A.C. and the reign of Severus Alexander.1325 One strong argument against this hypothesis is that there survive other Ephesian inscriptions that mention a victory by so-and-so, "Puqiavdi e{kth/ meta; th;n ajnanevwsin or

IEphesos 1147 and 1147A, respectively.

1327

See Chapter I, page 14.

1328

Michaud (1970), 949–950, fig. 132: "∆Oluvmpia, Kapetwvleia ejn ÔRwvmh/, Nevan Povlin, “Aktia, ejn ∆Efevsw/ puqikw'n B—, ejn ∆Efevsw/ ajgeneivwn kai; ajndrw'n hJmevra/ A—, Smuvrna, Pevrgamon." There is, for instance, no mention of an Isthmian victory among the extant wreaths, though one would expect one before the athlete would be permitted to erect a monument to himself at that sanctuary. The broken, bottom edge of the stele allows the possibility of one or two rows of wreaths below the lowest ones preserved.

1322

J. and L. Robert (1977), 396–397; cf. idem (1974), 516. But in the initial publication of the following inscription, Knibbe (1972–75), 48–56, #15 argued that the Pythian Games of Ephesos were indeed quadrennial. 1323

1326

1329

The new Isthmian Games sponsored by Marius Septimius Marion were of comparable status for being able to attract the very successful wrestler, M. Aurelius Asklepiades, who could boast a victory at Olympia and several honourary citizenships (SEG 26.1258). This M. Aurelius Asklepiades is not the same individual who occupied a prestigious post in the headquarters of the athletic synod at Rome (IG XIV.1102, and see note 1222 above) but is rather the man mentioned in IG V.1.66 (cf. J. and L. Robert [1976], 567). Another mark of the Isthmian Games' fame is the victor's inscription (IEphesos 4.1111, ca A.D. 225) for the wrestler M. Aurelius Zotikos, a man whom Elagabalus had brought to Rome a few years before and married in a public ceremony (SHA, Heliogabalus 10.2–6; Cassius Dio 79.16).

SEG 26.1261.

1324

Robert (1949a), 84–85 discusses only the coin SNG Copenhagen 443, one of whose prize crowns, it will be remembered, is too worn to show what, if any, letter or letters it once bore. Furthermore, the relevant volume of the SNG von Aulock was not published until 1957. 1325

I can find no reason why this emperor should have authorized games at Ephesos in the early 230s A.C.

205

Chapter VI

reign of Elagabalus explicitly indicate that their Pythian Games were a gift of that emperor to the city and were called the Aujgoustei'a Puvqia.1335 One issue bearing the portrait of Elagabalus and extant in a single, 43mm specimen shows on its reverse the emperor, in military cuirass and paludamentum, standing to face the right, extending with his left hand a victor's crown, identified PUQ⁄IA by a nearby inscription, towards a nude Apollo, and clasping right hands with the god; a small altar between the two figures completes the scene.1336 A 34mm bronze of Thyatira with the portrait of his empress, Annia Faustina, on the obverse has a very similar reverse type of Elagabalus presenting a labelled crown to the city Tyche.1337 The appearance of Annia Faustina conveniently fixes the foundation of these Pythian Games in A.D. 221, since she was his wife for only a brief interlude between bouts of a marriage to Aquilia Severa, a onetime Vestal Virgin.1338

this individual is obvious from the games' being referred to as the megavla Puvqia Mariavneia, which is reminiscent of his other agonistic patronage between about A.D. 220 and 240, the megav l a Mariav n a “Isqmia.1330 These festivals were distinct from a third one that simply bore the founder's name, ta; megavla Mariav n a, in much the same fashion that Iulius Demosthenes of Oinoanda founded and endowed in perpetuity the Dhmosqeneiva there.1331 Unlike imperial names, there is no reason to suppose that the epithets of Puv q ia, “Isqmia, or ∆Oluvmpia could be applied arbitrarily to the same festival, particularly since this chapter has shown a few instances in which the creation of new Pythian Games required the emperor's intervention.1332 Since mention has already been made of a renewal (aj n anev w si") of Pythian Games at Ephesos, the likeliest suggestion is that Elagabalus permitted a defunct set of games to be refounded at the same time that he granted the city its fourth neokorate, which would explain the inclusion of a Pythian crown in the reverse type of some Elagabalan issues of Ephesos. The new festival presumably received no subvention from the emperor; and thus there existed an opportunity for Marius Septimius Marion, a local magnate, to solve the question of funding by volunteering for a lifetime of service.1333 As the grammateu;" dhvmou, Marion no doubt enjoyed a high profile in Ephesos, but his additional self-reference as oJ filosev b (asto") would have been especially significant in connection with a festival that furthered imperial ideology and the boy-emperor's own affiliation with a Syrian sun-god, deus Sol invictus Elagabalus.1334

Organization of Pythian Games at Side This chapter has so far noted a few known, or at least highly plausible, instances of an emperor's adventus or victory furnishing the occasion for the initiation of a iJero;" kai; stefanivth" ajgwvn. One might therefore expect that such a thing happened only with his express sanction, but a couple of exceptions detract somewhat from the simplicity of this scenario. The first instance does not concern Pythian Games, but it is nonetheless informative of the concessions that the late 2nd c. A.C. Senate was still empowered to make. Commodus, as was mentioned earlier, was willing to allow the creation of new sacred games, so long as they bolstered the ideology of the reigning emperor. His favourite, Saoteros from Nikomedia in Bithynia, was happy to further the emperor's programme and, at the same time, increase his own kydos back home when he used his personal influence to persuade the Senate to grant Nikomedia the right to hold sacred games and erect a temple to the emperor.1339 One might argue that as the emperor's favourite, Saoteros unofficially enjoyed the coercive potential of the

Elagabalus was also responsible for the foundation of other Pythian Games at Thyatira in Lydia and his hometown of Emesa. In these instances, the institution of specifically Pythian Games is an explicable ramification of the Apollo-Helios syncretism already current in Greek culture, since Elagabal of Emesa was himself a solar god. Pythian Apollo and his tripod were thus, by stages and over time, translated from Delphi to Syria. In the case of Thyatira, coins dating to the 1330 megavla Puvqia Mariavneia: IEphesos 4.2073 (A.D. 235–238). ta; megavla Puvqia ejn ∆Efevsw/: IEphesos 4.1261 (A.D. 235–238). megavla Mariavna “Isqmia: IEphesos 4.1111 and SEG 26 (1976), #1258–1260 (all ca A.D. 225).

1335 BMC Lydia, 298, #38 (semi-autonomous issue of the early 3rd c. A.C.); 16th April, 1955 H.R.P. Frey auction, lot 1158 (Elagabalus); 27th September, 1962 sale of the Glendining Collection, lot 156 (=1925 Naville auction XI, lot 911; Valerian). In this last instance, the Aujgoustei'a Puvqia are commemorated alongside the local ÔAdriavna ∆Oluvmpia.

1331

1336

ta; megavla Mariavna: IEphesos 4.1109–1110, SEG 26.1262 (ca A.D. 225). For the agonistic foundation of Demosthenes at Oinoanda, see Chapter IV, pages 111 and 132.

19–20th June, 1964 Münzen und Medaillen auction, lot 426. The same civic magistrate who oversaw this issue, the strategos T. Castratus Icianus, also put his name on another contemporary issue that commemorated the games' foundation: within a large wreath of laurel are inscribed the words, AUGOU⁄STEIA ⁄ PUQIA ⁄ QUATEI⁄RHNW⁄N (16th April, 1955 H.R.P. Frey auction, lot 1158). The same obverse die was used with both extant examples of these two reverse types.

1332 In joining the inscription IEphesos 4.1147 to IEphesos 6.2073, both of which pertain to the games of Marius Septimius Marion, Engelmann (1987), 152–153 (=SEG 37.889) also acknowledges the existence of three different contests, the Puvqia, the Mariavna, and the Mariavna “Isqmia.

1337

9th December, 1982 Edward J. Waddell, Ltd auction, lot 314.

1338

Cassius Dio 80.9.3–4.

1333

IEphesos 4.1108, SEG 26.1261: ajgwnoqevth" diæ aijw'no" of the Pythian Games; a similar phrase, ajqloqevth" dia; bivou, applies to his sponsorship of the local Isthmian Games (SEG 26.1258–1260). 1334

1339

Cassius Dio 72.12.2. SHA, Commodus 4.5. PIR1 S 137. Millar (1977), 81, 350.

SEG 26.1261.

206

Chapter VI emperor himself, and that this grant of a hieros agon at Nikomedia was in effect a deed of Commodus. But our surviving sources for his reign indicate that Commodus had little interest in the Senate and its procedure.1340 Another part of the answer is that this action was spontaneously undertaken and seen to its conclusion by Saoteros for his own ends and did not apparently result from the petition of an embassy to Rome. We have already seen from a letter of Hadrian to the Delphians that a conscientious emperor, such as Hadrian, would see to it that matters pertaining to important festivals were brought before the Senate for ratification, even if the outcome of the Senate's verdict was largely predetermined by the emperor's personal sentiments.1341 In this case, there was no embassy, and Commodus was absent from the whole process. One can be sure that Commodus did not openly disapprove of new games and a temple at Nikomedia; and a private appreciation of Saoteros's spontaneous piece of flattery is quite possible. One salient fact emerges from the anecdote, that the Senate was technically empowered to grant the concession of sacred games without direction to do so from above. In theory, the creation of new Pythian Games was not solely an imperial perquisite but might be accomplished by anyone able to bully the Senate into approving such a grant.

two places were first initiated on the occasion of the first Pythian Games at Side.

In practice, the emperor surely had some role in the creation of Pythian Games, even if that role has not obtruded itself into our sources. There is for instance no emperor in evidence at the founding of Pythian Games at the prosperous Pamphylian city of Side in about A.D. 243.1342 One external presence that may have played a role in the festival's creation was that of Delphi, if one is justified in retrojecting later developments. In about the year A.D. 251, the bouleutai M. Aurelius Seleukos and his homonymous son erected a special podium in Side for trumpeter and herald contestants in the third Pythiad of the local Pythian Games. The Pythian agonothetes was apparently annoyed by this trespass upon his responsibility and a diminished opportunity to garner prestige for himself. An appeal was made to Delphi for mediation, and the Pythian oracle assuaged the quarrel with diplomatic responses in verse that were later engraved upon the podium.1343 It is likely that the Valerianic coinage recalling a homonoia between Side and Delphi may have some connection with an embassy to the Pythian oracle in 251; and one is tempted to suppose that formal relations between the

But if one looks beyond Side itself, one must consider an inscription from Tas/ahır (ancient Kasai) among the mountains of nearby Cilicia. This text was engraved on a monument erected to a prominent local by his

The coins in question number a few examples of two reverse types in large, 38mm module. Four specimens are known of Valerian's Type 1 coins of Side:1344 two Nikai face one another heraldically and hold up a victor's crown and palm branches between themselves; around the edge and along the bottom of the flan runs the legend SIDHTWN DELFWN ⁄ OMONOIA, arranged so that each ethnic runs behind one of the two Nikai. Three specimens are known of Valerian's Type 2 coins of Side:1345 the clothed Apollo of Side stands to right, holds a staff, and receives a victor's crown, labelled IEROS, from the nude Apollo of Delphi, who stands to the left and rests his right elbow upon the lip of a tripod, around which a serpent is coiled; the figures are further identified by the same inscription as appears on the previous type. Somewhat rarer is a third issue to commemorate the homonoia between Side and Delphi:1346 between the lines of the usual inscription two large prize crowns are shown, each one with two palm branches propped up inside it; another inscription runs across the front of one crown to the other, IERA ⁄ PUQIA. What is notable about these coins of Side is that they lack all explicit indication that the local Pythian Games were connected with the emperor.1347

1344

SNG von Aulock 4838–4839; 21st April, 1986 Numismatik Lanz sale 36, lot 864 (same die pair as for the first two); Staatliche Museen, Berlin, 167 (=Nollé, [1990], 261, #117). All four examples share the same obverse die, which was also employed to strike the other set of homonoia coins. 1345

18–19th June, 1970 Münzen und Medaillen auction, lot 504; University of Dusseldorf cast collection, Inv. 5157 (=Nollé [1990], 261, #118); Fontana Collection (=Franke et al. [1988], 47, #25). All three of these coins appear to have been struck from the same pair of dies and share the same obverse die with Type 1 and Type 3. 1346

23rd–24th February, 1978 Numismatic Fine Arts sale 5, the Frank Kovacs Collection, lot 328 (=Nollé [1990], 261, #19). The same obverse die used to strike this coin was also employed for Types 1 and 2. 1347

One might argue that the Nikai on Type 1 are indirectly associable with a successful, or would-be successful, campaign of Valerian in the east, but the symbolic value of Nikai is too broad and diffuse to allow such an interpretation in the absence of other connections with the emperor. They would be more appropriately invoked at the foundation of a new set of games, but there is no trace of imperial iconography on Side's Pythian Games coins of the 240s A.C. (e.g. Nollé [1990], 247, 257, #10, 93, 95–96). More cogent is an issue struck in the name of Philip II, son and co-ruler with Philip I (244–249 AD), that bears the same reverse type of two Nikai supporting a crown but has the surprising legend IS AIWNA ⁄ TA PU⁄QIA ⁄ SIDHTWN. One of the most notable events of the reign of Philip I was his celebration in lavish style of Rome's thousandth anniversary in A.D. 248. This coin would have been struck for Side's second Pythiad, probably in A.D. 247, and may reflect in its legend some of the patriotic enthusiasm felt for Rome and her emperors on the eve of her thousandth birthday (Nollé [1990], 259 and #96).

1340

Cassius Dio 71–72. Herodian 1–2. SHA, M. Antoninus, and Commodus. 1341

FD III.4.302, col. II, lines 1–2 (cf. p. 78): "ªKaºq≥æ a} mevntoi crh; poiei'n kata; tou;ª"º novmou", ªeijºsªhvnegkanº ⁄ gn≥wvmhn eij" th;n lamprotavthn sªuvgºklhton...." 1342

For an overview of Side's history, topography, and, in particular, epigraphy, see Nollé (1993). 1343

Fox (1986), 225. J. and L. Robert (1982), 417–422. Weiss (1981).

207

Chapter VI daughter in about the 240s A.C.1348 The recipient's name is not preserved, but what is important for the purpose at hand is the following account of his activities at Side:1349

25

30

35

It must be admitted that the evidence of Side's coins does not actually preclude the agency of Gordian III in the institution of Pythian Games there; but the inscriptions from the marble bema upon which heralds and musicians once stood to compete in the Pythian Games of Side can be adduced to clarify the somewhat ambiguous situation.1353 The bema, referred to as a bavsi" in one inscription, was a large, single block of marble with a single step cut into its front face and relief decoration on all four lateral faces. It apparently rested upon a larger, no longer extant platform called the bwmov " , which the benefactors gilded.1354 T h e reliefs on the bema represent what were surely among the events of Side's Pythian Games: a trumpeter (salpigkthv " ) and herald (kh' r ux) standing on either side of a giant victor's crown inscribed IERA PUQIA adorn the principal, front face; a race of two-horse chariots (sunwrivde") covers the back face; and, on the bema's much-damaged left and right faces, figures of Apollo preside over musical contests involving the aulos and kithara.1355

ajgwnoqethvsanta kai; gumnasiarchvsanta poluvtelw" meta; th;n dhmiourgivan ajgw'no" iJerou' oijkoumenikou' ∆Apollwneivou Gordianeivou ∆Antwneinivou ijsopuqivou ejkeceirivou ijselastikou' ij" a{pasan th;n oijkoumevnhn kata; qeivan dwrea;n tou' prwvtw" ajcqevnto" uJpæ aujtou', filoteimhsavmenon de; kaªi;º ij" th;n kataskeuvhn tou' uJdreivou tou' kataskeuazomevnou ejn th/' lamprotavth/ kai; ejndovxw/ Sidhtw'n povli ajrgurivou dhnavria pentakisceivlia.

The inclusion of the emperor Gordian's name in the official titulature of the games strongly suggests, following the example of other titulatures already cited, that this emperor was in some way responsible for their foundation. The agency is confirmed by the words qeivan dwreavn, ‘a divine munificence’, in other words a permission to hold a set of games of the highest rank that granted by the emperor himself, as well as by the explicit phrase, "ajgw'no" ...ajcqevnto" uJpæ aujtou' ªs.c. Gordiavnouº."1350 Side is supposed to have earned the privilege of staging Pythian Games in return for provisioning troops in Syria.1351 Our ambitious friend from Kasai no doubt hoped to make a name for himself by underwriting the first occasion of these games in a manner worthy of their imperial licence (polutelw' " ); and the same inscription proudly announces a gift of 5,000 silver denarii for the construction of a nymphaeum at Side ("...ij" th;n kataskeuh;n tou' uJdreivou tou' kataskeuazomevnou ejn th' / lamprotav t h/ kai; ej n dov x w/ Sidhtw' n pov l i, ll. 32–35").1352

1348

Whereas the numismatic allusions to the homonoia between Side and Delphi are found on coins of Valerian (A.D. 253–260), the inscriptions from this small monument prove that relations between the two cities were initiated a few years earlier, probably in A.D. 251, during the reign of Trajan Decius (A.D. 249–251). The inscriptions do not indicate the reason for the formal homonoia attested a few years later on [1989], 500). Another inscription, also of the 3rd c. A.C., appears to corroborate the later date, since it mentions an agonothetes of the ajgw;n Foivbeio" at Side who was also the ejpimelhth;" tou' uJdreivou (Weiss [1981], 343; Bean and Mitford [1970], 38–41, #19). The ajgw;n Foivbeio" was a local festival quite distinct from the grander Pythian Games (Weiss [1981], 338). 1353 Weiss (1981), 315 (with earlier bibliography for the bema inscriptions). 1354 For the word bwmov" as meaning some sort of platform upon which one stood, see Weiss (1981), 329–330 and n.54. Particularly à propos is the use of this word by Pausanias at Olympia in precisely the sense envisioned for the Side monument (5.22.1):

e[sti de; bwmo;" ejn th'/ “Altei th'" ejsovdou plhsivon th'" ajgouvsh" ej" to; stavdion: ejpi; touvtou qew'n me;n oujdeni; quvousin ∆Hlei'oi, salpigktai'" de; ejfesthkovsin aujtw'/ kai; toi'" khvruxin ajgwnivzesqai kaqevsthke.

Bean and Mitford (1970), 43–45.

1349

An excerpt from Bean and Mitford (1970), 44, #21b, as emended slightly by Weiss (1981), 332; cf. J. and L. Robert (1982), 418. The term gumnasiarchvsanta indicates that the man from Kasai also undertook to furnish olive oil for the contestants during the games.

Bwmoiv were also employed as speakers' platforms during the Pythian Games at Delphi (Philostratos, Lives of the sophists 1.9, 493):

1350

J. and L. Robert (1982), 418. The word dwreav occasionally appears as part of an agonistic device on coins of this period (Harl [1987], 65: a festival granted to Side by Valerian).

ªoJ Gorgiv a "º ej m prev p wn de; kai; tai' " tw' n ÔEllhv n wn panhguvresi to;n me;n lovgon to;n Puqiko;n ajpo; tou' bwmou' h[chsen...

1351

Weiss (1981), 340. Side was at this time the seat of the Roman governor of Lycia-Pamphylia, one of the principal ports on the south coast of Asia Minor, and lay along the most expeditious route (as it still does) between the Aegean coast of Anatolia and Syria (Nollé [1993]; McDonagh [1989], 499–500).

And one might even recite verse from a bwmo;", as indicated by the anonymous author of The contest of Homer and Hesiod (315–317): "ªoJ ”Omhro"º dievpleusen eij" Dh'lon eij" th;n panhvgurin. kai; staqei;" ejpi; to; keravtinon bwmo;n levgei u{mnon eij" ∆Apovllwna..." 1355

A thymiaterion sets the religious context of the left face's relief; and the attributes of tripod and crow suggest that the god at hand is specifically Pythian Apollo. The right face of the bema is backed almost up against a wall of the Side museum and is thus difficult to examine properly, in addition to being heavily damaged. However, the number and sort of figures are obviously similar to those on the left side. Weiss ([1981], 329) believes that both the left and right faces represent the ritual procession (pomphv) that would certainly have been a part of a festival like the Pythian Games.

1352

The use of the present participle precludes the possibility that a single grant of 5,000 denarii was enough to pay for the whole project. It was instead an undertaking that required many years and the combined generosity of several benefactors. Peter Weiss (1981), 341–343 (cf. J. and L. Robert [1982], 418) has reasonably connected the uJdrei'on with an ornate, three-storey nymphaeum of which much still stands outside and opposite the main gate into Side, but which has generally been attributed to the 2nd c. A.C. (e.g. McDonagh

208

Chapter VI coins, but they do illustrate the divine sanction sought by two Sidetans and granted by the Delphic oracle. The inscriptions deserve full quotation before one can pass judgment on their significance:1356

homonoia with Delphi by the time of Valerian that has already been mentioned, a phenomenon that is almost unique in the Roman period to this instance.1357 The verse inscriptions are, in effect, Delphi's sanction for actions described on the prose inscription as undertaken by the father and son team of Seleukos senior and junior on the third occasion of the Pythian Games in ca A.D. 251 Louis Robert has persuasively explained the probable scenario:1358

Front face: ªQeºw'/ ª . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40–45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mavrko" Aujrhvºl≥io" ≥o≥"≥ Sevleuko" kai; Mavrko" Aujrhvlio" Seleukiano;" Sev≥l≥e≥u≥k≥o" tetravki nevo" oJ uiJo;" bouleutai; to;n bwmo;n kataskeuavsante" kai; cruswvsante" ajnevqesan su;n th/' bavsei, ajgw'no" ajgomevnou to; trivton iJerou' oijkoumenikou' ijsopuqivou ∆Apol5 lwnivou ejkeceirivou eijselastikou' eij" a{pasan th;n oijkoumevnhn, ajgwnoqetouvntwn meta; dhmiourgivan Oujettianou' Pompwnianou' Klaudianou' Diogevnou" iJppikou' kai; Aujrhlivou Difilianou' Difivlou iJppikou', ajlutarcou'nto" Devkmou ∆Iounivou Likinnivou Titianou' uiJou' Titianou' filodovxou.

Or «les vêtements brillants» sont justement la marque de l'agonothète ...et du démiurge éponyme. Les oracles, sollicités et obtenus, sont donc la trace d'une discussion entre évergètes; les deux bouleutes, assurément riches, voulaient offrir une somptueuse offrande avec sculptures et dorures, qui devait tenir une grande place lors de la célébration pentétérique, pour la proclamation des vainqueurs et, selon [Weiss ( 1 9 8 1 ) ] , lieu de la présentation des concurrents; d'ailleurs les dédicants ont évoqué, par les sculptures, tout l'ensemble du concours. Il y eut opposition des plus hauts magistrats évergètes, les magistrats aux costumes rutilants. D'où la réponse de l'oracle: «Ce n'est pas en l'emportant par des vêtements rutilants que tu te montres admirable, mais tu brilles en esprit d'un éclat pur».

Left face (A): TNQ [=359] Ouj stilpnai'" ejsqh'si kekasmevno" ei[deai ajm≥ªfivº qhhto;", kaqarh'/ de; novw/ perilavmpeai ai[glh/: kai; se qeoi; tivousi kai; ejktelevousin ejeldwr, 5 o{tti ken ajrhvseo sofh/' freni; mevtria eijdwvª"º.

Delphi's permission, in other words, was not necessary for the establishment of these, or any other Pythian Games; but the oracle's sanction was still deemed important and an efficacious verdict for the resolution of such problems as might arise in connection with the games.

Right face (B): SOD [=274] Sh;n ajreth;n a[gnoia periskevpi ajmfibalou≥'s≥ªaº. aijdoi' meiliciovn te kai; aijneto;n e[rgon ajnuvssai panti; novw/ memaw;" uJpaleuv≥(e)a≥i≥, ajlla; qeoi'sin 5 e≥u≥a [ den, o{ppªw" tou'ºto perifardevw" su; televssh/"/

1357

The only other example of a homonoia with Delphi is that of Perge, another Pamphylian city, which is mentioned on coins issued during the reign of Valerian that bear a type very similar to the contemporary homonoia issues of Side (e.g. SNG von Aulock 4717): Artemis Pergaia stands in the left field holding her bow and arrows; in the right field stands a nude, Delphic Apollo; the words PU⁄QIA A(ujgoustei'a) A(sulei'a) are written in the field between them; and around the edge of the coin are the words PERGAIWN DELFWN O⁄M⁄ON⁄OI⁄A. An almost identical type was issued by Perge a few years earlier for Volusianus, son of Trebonianus Gallus (A.D. 251–253), with the simpler legend PUQIA A(ujgoustei'a or -sulei'a, Waddington Collection #3410). This may well have been the first occasion of the Pythian Games at Perge, which were still celebrated twenty-four years later when the ephemeral emperor M. Claudius Tacitus (A.D. 275–276, PLRE 1.873) chose Perge as a staging post for his campaign to rid Asia Minor of Gothic incursions (SEG 34.1306). But Side and Perge do not seem to have been bitter rivals, since a few coins issued already under Gordian III proclaim an amicable homonoia between the two cities (Nollé [1990], 261, #113–116; SNG von Aulock 4698–4700, 4833). For the issue of homonoia coinages, a phenomenon of the late 2nd to mid 3rd c. A.C., see Harl (1987), 77, pl. 5.1(Pisidian Apollonia, with the Lycian koinon), 6.1 (Ephesos and Alexandria), 31.9 (Mytilene, Pergamon, and Ephesos), and 31.10 (Phrygian Kibyra and Hierapolis). The iconography invariably takes the form of a juxtaposition of the respective cities' patron deities, who are often shown shaking hands or sacrificing together to symbolize a close degree of political cooperation or cultural affiliation.

Most scholars have understood the inscriptions on each of the two lateral faces to be proclamations by the Delphic oracle and, though, we admittedly know of no other oracular pronouncements issued in connection with the founding or celebration of other Pythian Games, this hypothesis is still reasonable. In the case of Side we have the numismatic evidence for a formal 1356

Weiss (1981), 318, as modified slightly by J. and L. Robert (1982), 419 in line B 4. For a full discussion of the text and its translation, see Weiss (1981), 318–322. Weiss (1981), 322–326, 332–334 has convincingly explained the numerals at the top of both lateral surfaces as dates, expressed in terms of two different city-eras used concurrently, that both denote the year A.D. 251 for the third occasion of Side's Pythian Games. This would date their foundation to A.D. 243, a time when Gordian III was still campaigning against the Sassanids in northern Mesopotamia and Side would have been a vital point along the supply line for his armies. See, for example, reverse legends on Sidetan coins dating from Valerian's eastern campaigns: PIS⁄THS⁄ FILHS⁄ SUMMACOU⁄ RWMAIWN⁄ MUSTIDOS⁄ SIDHS⁄ and SIDHTWN A NEOKORWN⁄ NAUARC⁄IS (Nollé [1990], 253, #77–78; cf. #79–83).

1358

209

J. and L. Robert (1982), 419.

Chapter VI

both instances by the phrase ajgwnoqethvsanta or ajgwnoqetouvntwn meta; th;n dhmiourgivan. The bema inscription also mentions an officer known as the aj l utav r ch", whom we might call the marshal or referee of the contests. Although no such position is known from the games at Delphi, the term is commonly encountered in the 2nd and 3rd c. A.C. at the sites of Olympic Games and refers to one whose duty it was to ensure that peace and order were observed by athletes and spectators; and to enforce obedience he had charge of a platoon of aj l uv t ai (sometimes called mastigov f oroi) who might inflict corporal punishment with truncheons or whips.1363 One should note in this connection that Side had its own Olympic Games in the 3rd c. A.C.1364 The title of gymnasiarches has parallels in the inscriptions of Roman Delphi, just as it does in countless poleis of the Empire, and is thus more a general marker of Hellenic culture than a term specific to the Pythian Games.

If the two bouleutai of Side were willing to go to great lengths and expense for the sake of securing a prestigious status at home, one has to wonder whether Delphi benefitted in a material way from its role. The same question arises in connection with the homonoia between a populous, and apparently prosperous, Asian city such as Side and a sanctuary site in quiet Achaea. Given the spirit of the age, it is entirely possible that Side offered money or patronage of sanctuary activities in reciprocation for the Delphi's moral support, but there exists no sure evidence to confirm such a hypothesis. What develops from the evidence presented in previous chapters is that Delphi did not suffer apparent neglect before the 4th c. A.C. and must consequently have continued to receive support from certain sources. The best one can do is to adduce a practice from Roman Olympia. It has been mentioned elsewhere that king Herod of Judaea once made a generous contribution for the maintenance of the competitions at Olympia, a trend of benefaction we know to have been continued into the 2nd c. A.C. by other wealthy individuals from outside of Greece.1359 Another source of support that Olympia enjoyed, according to Malalas, was the sale of the right to hold their own Olympic Games to cities such as Antioch.1360 A similar payment of licensing fees has also been suggested in connection with the new Olympic Games that were instituted at Ephesos and Smyrna; it is unknown whether Hadrian urged these cities to repay Elis for the privilege, perhaps with cash payments or by underwriting the games' production, or if Elis actually sold the right of holding Olympic Games to any city that could pay the price.1361

Sol and the Pythian Games Whereas troop movements, the needs of the commissariat, and felicitous victory might well have led to the foundation of a festival, one must produce a reason why the festivals instituted were frequently called Pythian. One clear connection between Pythian Games and their imperial instigation was the increasing identification of the imperial personage in the 3rd c. A.C. with Sol (Invictus), who might be equated with Apollo-Helios.1365, Indeed, the emperor who most closely allied himself with a solar deity, Elagabalus, is known to have founded such festivals at Rome, Lydian Thyatira, and his hometown of Emesa as a direct outgrowth of this enthusiasm. For the Antoninia Pythia he founded at Rome, we have only

Another example, attested in the case of Olympia, of the deference owed by a city hosting a new set of games to the original venue seems to have been the transmission of certain records from the former to the latter. After Augustus founded the is-Olympic Sebasteia games at Neapolis in 2 B.C., a copy of the new festival's charter was erected in the Altis at Olympia.1362 It is regrettable that no comparable instances are known from Delphi, but one might reasonably suppose that such an observance would have resulted from the official homonoia between Side and Delphi.

1363 Pleket (1976), 9–15. L. Robert (1949b), 97; and idem (1948), 61. For alytarchai at Side, see Bean (1949), 74; and idem (1965), 35, #127. For mastigophoroi at Roman Olympia, see Lucian, Hermotimos 40. Libanios (Orations 10.4, 7, 21) vividly describes the role of the alytarches and his minions at the Olympic Games of 4th c. A.C. Antioch. In this case, the same local worthy, Argyrios, filled the roles of both agonothetes and alytarches (10.9–10). Another festival heavily inspired by the original Olympic Games, the Sebasteia founded by Augustus at Neapolis, is known to have had mastigophoroi as well (IOlympia 56, 2 B.C.). 1364

Nollé (1987); cf. Lämmer (1967) for an overview of other Olympic Games throughout the Greek East.

The inscriptions from Tas/ahır and from the bema in Side are consistent in the information they present about the administration of that city's Pythian Games, an administration that bears some similarities to the Delphic system described in Chapter II. The games at Side were produced by one or more ajgwnoqevtai; and the relative seniority of this office is demonstrated in

1365

The Oriental sun god (as opposed to the older, Italic Sol) is known at Rome before the reign of Elagabalus (A.D. 218–222). His first attestation in Rome dates from A.D. 102 (CIL VI.31034), and by A.D. 158 he is called Sol Invictus (CIL VI.715). The first known assimilation of the emperor with Sol Invictus is a Caracallan inscription discovered in a Mithreum in Friedberg, Hesse (Marbach [1927], col. 906). The solar cult instituted by Elagabalus was merely a more extreme turn of events; and by the time of Aurelian's victory over the Palmyrene kingdom in A.D. 274 Sol was the dominant god in the pantheon (SHA, Aurelian 1.3, 4, Tacitus 9.2; Eutropius 9.15). Through Sol's increasingly close association with the emperor during the 3rd c. A.C., the new Pythian Games were arguably one facet of the imperial cult (Mitchell [1993], 224): "The sacred games [of the 3rd c. A.C.] were...an important new extension of the imperial cult, promoted, as in earlier centuries, as much by the emperors themselves as by their subjects."

1359 Josephos, The Jewish war 1.426–428. Pleket (1976), 1–9. See also Chapter II, page 64. 1360

Malalas 10.248.28b.

1361

Pleket (1976), 15–18.

1362

IOlympia 56.

210

Chapter VI the evidence of a single inscription discovered at Delphi.1366 The fact that these games are otherwise unattested suggests that they did not long outlive Elagabalus. The Pythian Games of Emesa were likely of similarly short duration since they are attested only by four coins of a single type, not by any inscriptions. The coins' one reverse type is a stereotypical victor's crown between two laurel branches and the significant inscription HLIA ⁄ PUQIA.1367 On the other hand, the Pythian festival at Thyatira is known to have flourished until the reign of Valerian and may thus have enjoyed a local enthusiasm that went beyond imperial fiat.1368

chapter, but they were not even on the top rung of this sort of benefaction. One might doubt the worth of ancient Delphi in absolute terms amid the political posturings of emperors and cities, but the very survival for so many centuries of Delphi is remarkable. This it accomplished by being more of an ideal than a place. It is fair to say that the acme of Delphi's influence passed even before the explosive expansion in the Hellenistic and Roman periods of the world that considered itself both civilized and, in some sense of the word, Hellenic. But even within the smaller orbit of the Archaic and Classical periods Delphi had never been the only, or even the chief, arbiter of power. All the same, Kroisos would not have tried to cajole, nor Philip II to control, an empty symbol; and centuries later much of the same solicitude still existed for this most translatable of symbols. Delphi, like Pythian Apollo, its often passive and seldom pro-active patron, was always more significant for what it was than for what it did. What ancient Delphi was, among other things, was a place for proving oneself through ostentation and competition; and for as long as personal worth was a priority in the ancient world, Delphi could offer a medium for its expression in a timeless and standardized context.

The new Pythian Games and their imperial connection were far from unique on the agonistic landscape but rather became integrated into a strictly hierarchical barometer of a city's prestige vis à vis its neighbours:1369 The city of Perinthus ...fervently espoused the Severan cause during the civil war of 193–95 and ...was the first city permitted to elevate her isopythian games of Apollo to Actian status. ...Caracalla granted Aktia to two other major eastern cities, which he undoubtedly visited, Sardes in Asia Minor and Tyre in Phoenicia. ...Caracalla probably regarded the Tyrians, who had promptly adhered to Septimius Severus in 193, as especially deserving of the magnificent Aktia. Cities most conspicuous in their loyalty obtained the coveted games; conversely, through disloyalty and disgrace, cities forfeited the right to Aktia. Tyre was stripped of both its colonial rank and its Actian Games after it had committed the unpardonable blunder of supporting an abortive coup against the emperor Elagabalus. During 220–21 Tyre held, and honored on its coins, the lesser Olympia Heraclea rather than the more illustrious Actia Heraclea. When Severus Alexander restored the city to its former standing, the Actian games once more returned to the city's coinage. Not only were the new Pythian Games part of a larger context, as was mentioned at the beginning of the

1366

Robert (1970), 23–27; cf. Herodian 6.6–7. Robert observes that Pythian Apollo was already considered a solar deity by this time (27). 1367

American Numismatic Society 1944.100.66209, 1971.193.11 (both from the same die pair), 1961.154.2; and BMC Galatia 240, #21. 1368

ISmyrna 667–668; cf. OMS 2, 1102 and, for the coins, page 206 above. The former inscription honours Aurelius Apollinarios, a runner from Thyatira, whose catalogue of notable victories begins with his successes in the Pythian Games of Delphi, Side, and Thyatira. In his retirement, Apollinarios, like a number of his more successful colleagues, received honourary positions in the athletes' guild from the co-emperors Valerian and Gallienus themselves. 1369

Harl (1987), 68.

211

Bibliography

Bibliography

The abbreviations used in this work generally follow the model of "Editorial policy, notes for contributors, and abbreviations," AJA 95 (1991), 1–16. In cases where this article does not list a particular journal or work, supplementary abbreviations are taken from Simon Hornblower and Anthony Spawforth eds., The Oxford classical dictionary3, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1996, xxix–liv. Nevertheless, this work does contain some abbreviations that are to be found in neither source. These are: BMC

=British Museum catalogue of Greek coins, 1873–1927

CID

=Corpus des inscriptions de Delphes, 1977–

RIC

=Roman imperial coinage, 1923–1996.

SNG

=Sylloge nummorum Graecorum, 1933–

Abert, H. "Sakadas." RE 2nd ser., 1.2 (1920), cols. 1768–1769. Alcock, Susan E. Graecia capta: The landscapes of Roman Greece. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993(a). . "Spaced–out sanctuaries: The ritual landscape of Roman Greece." in Theoretical Roman archaeology: First conference proceedings. ed. Eleanor Scott. Worldwide Archaeology Series 4. Aldershot, U.K.: Avebury, 1993(b). 155–165.

. "Placing the gods." in Sanctuaries and sacred space in ancient Greece. eds. Susan E. Alcock and Robin Osborne. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.

. "Nero at play? The emperor's Grecian odyssey." in Reflections of Nero: culture, history and representation. eds. J. Masters and J. Elsner. London: Duckworth, 1995. 98–111.

Amandry, Michel. Le monnayage des duovirs corinthiens. BCH Supplément XV. Paris: Éditions E. de Boccard, 1988. Amandry, Michel et al. Roman provincial coinage. vol. 1. London: British Museum Press. Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale, 1992. Amandry, Pierre. "Rapport préliminaire sur les statues chryséléphantines de Delphes." BCH 63 (1939), 86–119. . La mantique apollinienne à Delphes: essai sur le fonctionnement de l'Oracle. Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d'Athènes et de Rome. Paris: E. de Boccard, Éditeur, 1950.

. "Notes de topographie et d'architecture delphiques. VI. La fontaine Castalie." in Études Delphiques. BCH Supplément IV. Paris: de Boccard, 1977. 179–228.

. "Notes de topographie et d'architecture delphiques. VII. La fontaine Castalie (compléments)." BCH 102 (1978), 221–241.

. "Chronique delphique (1970–1980)." BCH 105 (1981), 673–769.

. "La fête des Pythia." Praktika 65 (1990) [1992], 279–317.

Amandry, Pierre et al. L'Antre corycien. vol. 1. BCH Supplément VII. Paris: de Boccard, 1981. . L'Antre corycien. vol. 2. BCH Supplément IX. Paris: de Boccard, 1984.

Ameling, Walter. Herodes Attikos. Band II. Inschriftenkatalog. Hildesheim, Zurich, and New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 1983. Anderson, J.C. "A topographical tradition in the fourth century chronicles. Domitian's building programme," Historia 32 (1983), 93–105. 212

Bibliography Anderson, J.K. Ancient Greek horsemanship. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1961. Andrewes, A. The Greek tyrants. London: Hutchinson University Library, 1956. Arafat, K.W. Pausanias' Greece: Ancient artists and Roman rulers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Athanassiadi, Polymnia. "The fate of oracles in late antiquity: Didyma and Delphi." Delti˘on th" Cristianikh˘" Arcaiologikh˘" 1989–90, 271–278. Audiat, Jean. "L'hymne d'Aristonoos à Hestia." BCH 56 (1932), 299–312. Aupert, Pierre. Fouilles de Delphes. Tome II —Topographie et architecture: Le stade, Paris: Éditions de Boccard, 1979. . "L'évolution des appareils en Grèce à l'époque impériale." BCH 114 (1990), 593–637.

. "Le cadre des Jeux Pythiques." in Proceedings of an International Symposium on the Olympic Games. 5–9 September, 1988. eds. William Coulson and Helmut Kyrieleis. Athens: Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen, 1992. 67–71.

Avotins, I. "On the dating of the exedra of Herodes Atticus at Olympia." Phoenix 29 (1975), 244–249. Baladié, Raoul. Le Péloponnèse de Strabon. Étude de géographie historique. Paris: Société d'Édition "Les Belles Lettres", 1980. Balsdon, J.P. and Miriam T. Griffin. "Princeps." OCD3, 1246–1247. Barber, Godfrey Louis. "Ephorus." OCD2, 388. Barker, Andrew D. "Music." OCD3, 1003–1012. Barrow, R.H. Plutarch and his times. Bloomington, I.N.: Indiana University Press, 1967. Bean, George E. "Two epigraphical notes from Pamphylia." JHS 69 (1949), 73–75. . Side kitabeleri / The inscriptions from Side. Türk tarih kurumu yayinlarindan, ser. 5, no. 20. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1965.

. Lycian Turkey: An archaeological guide. London: Ernst Benn Limited, 1978.

Bean, George E. and T.B. Mitford. Journeys in Rough Cilicia 1964–1968. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Denkschriften, 102. Band. Ergänzungsbände zu den tituli Asiae Minoris. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1970. Beazley, Sir John. "Two swords: two shields." BABesch 14 (1939), 4–14. Bechtel, Friedrich. Die historischen Personennamen des Griechischen bis zur Kaiserzeit. Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1917. Bennett, H.C. "On the systemization of scholia dates for Pindar's Pythian Odes," HSCP 62 (1957), 61–78. Berg, Darice E. et al. eds. Excavations at Nemea. Topographical and architectural studies: the Sacred Square, the Xenon, and the Bath. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and Oxford: University of California Press, 1992. Bergmann, Marianne. Studien zum römischen Porträt des 3. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. Antiquitas: Reihe 3, Abhandlungen zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, zur klassischen und provinzial-römischen Archälologie und zur Geschichte des Altertums, Band 18. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt Verlag GmbH, 1977. Bieber, Margarete. The history of the Greek and Roman theater.2 Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961. Birley, Anthony R. Septimius Severus, the African Emperor. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1971. . "Antoninus Pius." OCD3, 113–115.

213

Bibliography Blake, M.E. Roman construction in Italy from Tiberius through the Flavians. Washington: Carnegie Institute of Washington, 1959. Blum, G. "Nouvelles inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 38 (1914), 25–37. Boardman, John. "Herakles. IV: Herakles' Labours. J. Herakles and the horses of Diomedes (Labour VIII)." LIMC 5.1 (1990), 67–71. Bol, Renate. Das Statuenprogramm des Herodes-Atticus-Nymphäums. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. Olympische Forschungen. Band XV. Berlin: Verlag Walter de Gruyter & Co., 1984. Bölte. "Lusoi." RE 13.2 (1927), cols. 1890–1899. Bommelaer, Jean–François. Guide de Delphes. Le site. École Française d'Athènes: Sites et Monuments —VII. Paris: Éditions E. de Boccard, 1991. . "Observations sur le théâtre de Delphes." in Delphes. Centenaire de la «Grande Fouille» réalisée par l'École Française d'Athènes (1892–1903). Actes du Colloque Paul Perdrizet, Strasbourg, 6–9 novembre 1991. ed. Jean-François Bommelaer. Université des sciences humaines de Strasbourg. Travaux du centre de recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Grèce Antiques 12. Leiden, New York, Copenhagen, and Cologne: E.J. Brill, 1992. 277–300.

Bourguet, Émile. De rebus delphicis imperatoriae aetatis. Montepulciano: Camille Colet et fils, 1905. . "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 49 (1925), 21–60.

Bousquet, Jean. "Inscriptions de Delphes, II." BCH 64–65 (1940–41), 107–110 . "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 66–67 (1942–43), 124–136.

. "La donation de L. Gellius Menogenes à Delphes et les thermes de l'est." BCH 76 (1952), 651–660.

. "Variétés."BCH 79 (1954), 427-428.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes. L'acceptation des Ptolemaia." BCH 82 (1958), 77–82.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 85 (1961), 69–97.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 87 (1963), 198–204.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 88 (1964), 380–394.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 90 (1966), 428–446.

. "Delphes et les ‘Pythioniques’ d'Aristote." REG 97 (1984), 374–380.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 116 (1992), 188–194.

Bowersock, Glen W. Augustus and the Greek world. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965(a). . "Some persons in Plutarch's Moralia," CQ 1965(b), 267–270.

Brenk, Frederick E. In mist apparelled. Religious themes in Plutarch's Moralia and Lives. Mnemosyne Supplement 48. Leiden: Brill, 1977. . "An imperial heritage: The religious spirit of Plutarch of Chaironeia." ANRW 2.36.1 (1987), 248–349.

Broneer, Oscar. "Excavations on the north slope of the Acropolis in Athens, 1933–1934." Hesperia 4 (1935), 109–188. . "Isthmia excavations, 1952." Hesperia 22 (1953), 182–195.

. "Excavations at Isthmia, third campaign, 1955–1956." Hesperia 27 (1958), 1–37.

. "The apostle Paul and the Isthmian Games." BiblArch 25 (1962), 2–31. 214

Bibliography . Isthmia.: Excavations by the University of Chicago, under the auspices of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Volume 2. Topography and architecture. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1972.

Brunet, Stephen A. "Prize crowns and Greek Imperial coinage." Paper presented to the graduate summer seminar of the American Numismatic Society, New York, August, 1986. Burkert, Walter. "Kynaithos, Polycrates, and the Homeric Hymn to Apollo." in Arktouros: Hellenic studies presented to Bernard M.W. Knox, eds. Glen W. Bowersock, Walter Burkert, and Michael C.J. Putnam. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1979, 53–62. . "The making of Homer in the sixth century B.C.: Rhapsodes versus Stesichoros." in Papers on the Amasis Painter and his world. Malibu, C.A.: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 1987. 43–62.

Burton, Graham P. "Corrector." OCD3, 402. Camp, John McK. "The philosophical schools of Roman Athens." The Greek renaissance in the Roman Empire: papers from the tenth British Museum classical colloquium. eds. Susan Walker and Averil Cameron. Bulletin Supplement 55. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1989. 50–55. Campbell, John Brian. "Tribuni militum." OCD3, 1549. Carroll, Kevin K. The Parthenon inscription. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Monograph 9. Durham, N.C.: Duke University, 1982. Càssola, Filippo. "Note sulla guerra crisea," in Miscellanea di studi classici in onore di Eugenio Manni. Tomo II. Rome: Giorgio Bretschneider, 1980, 415–439. Cavaignac, E. "Inscriptions de Delphes. Le préambule de l'édit du maximum." BCH 28 (1904), 400–407. Champion, Craige. "The Soteria at Delphi: Aetolian propaganda in the epigraphical record." AJP 116 (1995), 213–220. Chaniotis, A. "Zur Frage der Spezialisierung im griechischen Theater des Hellenismus und der Kaiserzeit auf der Grundlage der neuen Prosopographie der dionysischen Techniten." Ktema 15 (1990), 89–108. Clinton, Kevin. "Hadrian's contribution to the renaissance of Eleusis." inThe Greek renaissance in the Roman Empire: papers from the tenth British Museum classical colloquium. Bulletin Supplement 55. Susan Walker and Averil Cameron eds. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1989. 56–68. Colin, Georges. "Inscriptions de Delphes. Décrets amphictioniques en l'honneur des artistes dionysiaques." BCH 24 (1900), 82–123. . "Inscriptions de Delphes. Actes amphictioniques relatifs à la fortune du temple d'Apollon et aux limites du territoire sacré." BCH 27 (1903), 104–173.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes. La théorie athénienne à Delphes." BCH 30 (1906), 161–329.

Contoléon, A.–E. "Anecdota Delphica." BCH 60 (1936), 371–373. Cordischi, L. "Sul problema dell' Ara Pietatis Augusti e dei rilievi ad essa attribuiti." ArchCl 37 (1985), 238–265. de la Coste-Messelière, Pierre. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 49 (1925), 83–87. . Au musée de Delphes. Recherches sur quelques monuments archaïques et leur décor sculpté. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1936.

Courby, François. Fouille de Delphes. Tome II. —Topographie et architecture: La terrasse du temple. Fascicules 1–3. Paris: Fontemoing & Cie, Éditeurs and E. de Boccard, Éditeur. 1915–1927. Couvé, Louis. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 18 (1894), 70–100, 226–270. . "Nouvelles et correspondance. Grèce du nord. Phocide. Delphes." BCH 19 (1895), 548.

215

Bibliography Crowther, Nigel B. "Rome and the ancient Olympic games." Proceedings of the fifth Canadian symposium on the history of sport and physical education. Toronto. 1982. 52–58. Crusius, O. "Arion 5)." RE 2.1 (1895), 836–841. Dabrowa, Edward. L'asie mineure sous les Flaviens. Recherches sur la politique provinciale. tr. Elzbieta Willman. Prace Komisji Filologii Klasycznej 18. Oddzial and Krakow: Polska Akademia Nauk, 1980. Danieli, M.L. "Plutarco a Delfi. Note sulla religiosità plutarchea." Nuovo Didaskaleion 15 (1965), 5–23. Danoff, Christian M. "Philippopolis." RE 19 (1937), cols. 2244–2263. Daux, Georges. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 46 (1922), 439–466. . Pausanias à Delphes. Paris: Éditions A. Picard, 1937.

. "Plutarque, Moralia 409A–B et le prétendu faubourg delphique de ‘Pylaia.’" RA 11 (1938), 3–18.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 63 (1939), 142–182.

. Fouilles de Delphes. Chronologie delphique. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1943.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 68–69 (1944–45), 94–128.

. "Le poète Aristonoos de Corinthe." Revue de Philologie (1945), 5–11.

. "Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce en 1950. Seconde partie. Travaux de l'École Française (1). Delphes." BCH 75 (1951), 134–140.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes."BCH 48 (1954), 388-391.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 83 (1959), 466–495.

. "Concours des Titeia dans un décret d'Argos." BCH 88 (1964), 569–576.

. "Les empereurs et l'amphictionie pyléo–delphique." CRAI 1975, 348–362.

. "La composition du conseil amphictionique sous l'Empire." in Recueil Plassart. Paris: Société d'Édition "Les Belles Lettres", 1976. 59–79.

. "Notes de lecture. Un sigle équivoque." BCH 102 (1978), 610–612.

Daux, Georges and Erik Hansen. Fouilles de Delphes. Tome II —Topographie et architecture: Le trésor de Siphnos. Texte. Paris: Boccard, 1987. Deichgräber, K. "Polemon 9)." RE 21.2 (1952), 1288–1320. Delorme, J. Gymnasion. Étude sur les monuments consacrés à l'éducation en Grèce (des origines à l'Empire romain). Paris: E. de Boccard, 1960. . "Sphairestèrion et gymnase à Delphes, à Délos et ailleurs." BCH 106 (1986), 53–73.

Déroche, Vincent. "Rapport sur les travaux de l'École Française d'Athènes en 1990. Delphes. 4. —Agora romaine et «thermes du Sud»." BCH 115 (1991), 700–702. . "Les chapiteaux ioniques d'époque romaine et tardive à Delphes." in Delphes. Centenaire de la «Grande Fouille» réalisée par l'École Française d'Athènes (1892–1903). ed. Jean-François Bommelaer. Université des sciences humaines de Strasbourg. Travaux du centre de recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Grèce Antiques 12. Leiden, New York, Copenhagen, and Cologne: E.J. Brill, 1992, 301–315.

Déroche, Vincent et al. "Identification de marbres antiques à Delphes." BCH 113 (1989), 403–416. Déroche, Vincent and Platon Petridis. "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1991. Delphes. 4. —Agora romaine et «Thermes du Sud»." BCH 116 (1992), 709–710. 216

Bibliography . "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1992. Delphes. 3. —Agora romaine et Villa Sud-Est." BCH 117 (1993), 641–643.

. "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1993. Delphes. 1.—Agora romaine et Villa Sud-Est." BCH 118 (1994), 423.

Derow, Peter Sidney. "Polybius (1)." OCD3, 1209–1211. Devreker, J. "Les Orientaux aux sénat romain d'Auguste à Trajan." Latomus 41 (1982), 492–516. Diehl, E. ed. Monumenti Ancyrani versio Graeca.3 Bonn. 1918. Dillon, Matthew P.J. "‘The house of the Thebans’ (FD III, 1, 537–538) and accommodation for Greek pilgrims." ZPE 83 (1990), 64–88. Dittenberger, W. "Die attische Panathenaidenära." in Commentationes philologae in honorem T. Mommsen. Berlin: Weidmann, 1872. 242–253. Dörrie, H. "L. Kalbenos Tauros: die Persönlichkeit eines platonischen Philosophen um die Mitte des 2. Jhs. n. Chr." Kairos. Zeitschrift für Religionswissenschaft und Theologie 1973, 24–35. Dow, Sterling. "Andrews of Cornell." Cornell Alumni News 75.5 (December 1972), 13-21. . "Athletic agones in Roman Athens honoring Tykhe Poleos." AJP 100 (1979), 31–44.

Drachmann, A.B. ed. Scholia vetera in Pindari carmina. Vol. II. Scholia in Pythionicas. Leiden: B.G. Teubner, 1910. . Scholia vetera in Pindari carmina. Vol. III. Scholia in Nemeonicas et Isthmionicas epimetrum, Leiden: B.G. Teubner, 1927.

Drees, L. Olympia: gods, artists, and athletes. trans. Gerald Onn. New York: Praeger, 1968. Ducoux, Henri. "Chronique des fouilles 1940–1941. Delphes. Restauration de la façade du temple d'Apollon," BCH 64–65 (1940–41), 266–267. Dumont, Albert. Essai sur l'ephébie attique. 2 vols. Paris: Didot et Cie., 1875–1876. Dunant, Christiane. "Inscriptions trouvées au théâtre de Delphes." BCH 75 (1951), 307–315. Easterling, P.E. and Bernard M.W. Knox eds. The Cambridge history of classical literature. Volume I: Greek Literature. Part I: Early Greek Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Ebert, Joachim. "Paides pythikoi." Philologus 109 (1965), 152–156. . Griechische Epigramme auf Sieger an gymnischen und hippischen Agonen. Abhandlungen der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Philologisch–historische Klasse, Band 63, Heft 2. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1972.

Eck, Werner. "Aemilius 54a)." RE Suppl. 14 (1974a), col. 2. . "Nonius 21)." RE Suppl. 14 (1974b), cols. 285-286.

École Française d'Athènes. "Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce en 1950. Delphes." BCH 75 (1951), 134–140. . Guide de Delphes. Le musée. École Française d'Athènes: Sites et Monuments —VI. Paris: Éditions E. de Boccard. 1991.

Edwards, Katharine M. Corinth. Volume VI: Coins, 1896–1929. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press, 1933. Edwards, Walter M. et al. "Philostrati." OCD3, 1171. Einarson, B. "Plutarch's ancestry." CP 47 (1952), 99.

217

Bibliography Elwyn, Sue. "The recognition decrees for the Delphian Soteria and the date of Smyrna's inviolability." JHS 110 (1990), 177–180. Engelmann, H. "Der Berg Pion auf ephesischen Münzen." ZPE 67 (1987), 149–152. Engels, Donald. Roman Corinth. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1990. d'Escurac, H. Pavis. "Périls et chances du régime civique selon Plutarque." Ktema 6 (1981), 287–300. Evelein, M.A. De institutis olympiacis eorumque propagatione extra Olympia quaestiones variae. Leyden. 1908. Ferrary, Jean-Louis and Denis Rousset. "Un lotissement de terres à Delphes au IIe siècle après J.-C." BCH 122 (1998), 277–342. Flacelière, Robert. "Remarques sur les Sôtéria de Delphes." BCH 52 (1928), 256–291. . "Inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 54 (1930), 392–403.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes du IIIe siècle av. J.-C." BCH 59 (1935), 7–35.

. Les Aitoliens à Delphes: Contribution à l'histoire de la Grèce centrale au IIIe siècle av. J.-C. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1937(a).

. Sur les oracles de la Pythie. Paris: Société d'Édition Les Belles Lettres, 1937(b).

. "Le fonctionnement de l'oracle de Delphes au temps de Plutarque." Annales de l'École des Hautes Études de Gand 2 (1938), 69–107.

. Sur l'E de Delphes. Annales de l'université de Lyons, troisième série, fascicule 11. Paris: Société d'Édition des Belles Lettres, 1941.

. "Le poète Sarapion d'Athènes, ami de Plutarque." REG 64 (1951), 325–327.

. Dialogue sur les oracles de la Pythie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. 1962.

. "Rome et ses empereurs vus par Plutarque." AntClass 32 (1963), 28–47.

. "Hadrien et Delphes." CRAI 1971, 168–185.

Follet, S. Athènes au IIe et au IIIe siècle. Études chronologiques et prosopographiques. Paris: Société d'Édition “Les Belles Lettres”, 1976. Fontenrose, Joseph Eddy. The Delphic oracle: its responses and operations with a catalogue of responses. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1978. . "The cult of Apollo and the games at Delphi." in The archaeology of the Olympics. ed. Wendy J. Raschke. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1988. 121–140.

Forbes, C.A. "Expanded uses of the Greek gymnasium." CP 40 (1945), 32–42. . "The ancient athletic guilds." CP 50 (1955), 238–252.

Forrest, George. "The First Sacred War." BCH 80 (1956), 33–52. Fox, Robin Lane. Pagans and Christians. Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin Books, 1986. Franke, P.R. et al. Side. Münzprägung, Inschriften und Geschichte einer antiken Stadt in der Turkei. Saarbrücken: Institut für alte Geschichte der Universität des Saarlandes, 1988. Fraser, Peter M. "Two Hellenistic inscriptions from Delphi." BCH 78 (1954), 49–62. Friedländer, F. Roman life and manners under the early empire. trans. L.A. Magnus. London: George Routledge and Sons, 1907; rpt. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1968.

218

Bibliography Friesen, Steven J. Twice neokoros: Ephesus, Asia and the cult of the Flavian imperial family. Leiden, New York, and Cologne: E.J. Brill, 1993. Gaebler, H. "Die Losurne in der Agonistik." ZfN 39 (1929), 271–312. Gagé, J. "Actiaca." MEFR 53 (1936), 37–100. des Gagniers, Jean et al. Laodicée du Lycos. Le nymphée. Campagnes 1961–1963. Québec: Presses de l'Université Laval, 1969. Gallis, Kostas J. "The games in ancient Larisa: an example of provincial Olympic games." in The archaeology of the Olympics. ed. Wendy J. Raschke. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. 1988. 217–235. Gardiner, E. Norman. Athletics of the ancient world. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1930; rpt. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967. Garzetti, A. From Tiberius to the Antonines: A history of the Roman Empire, 12-192. trans. J.R. Foster. London: Methuen, 1974. Gasparri, C. "Lo stadio panatenaico." AnnScAtene 52–53 (1974–75), 313–392. Geagan, D.J. "Notes on the agonistic institutions of Roman Corinth." GRBS 9 (1968), 69–80. . "A letter of Trajan to a synod at Isthmia." Hesperia 44 (1975), 296–301.

Gebhard, Elizabeth R. "The sanctuary of Poseidon on the Isthmus of Corinth and the Isthmian Games." in Mind and body: Athletic contests in ancient Greece. ed. Olga Tzachou-Alexandri. Athens: Ministry of Culture, 1989, 80–88. Gebhard, V. "Thamyris." RE 2nd ser., 5.1 (1934), 1236–1245. de la Genière, Juliette. "À propos des métopes du monoptère de Sicyone à Delphes." CRAI 1983, 158–171. Gerassimov, T. "Einige Münzen und Medaillen von Philoppopel." Godisnik na Plovdivskata Narodna Bibl. i Muzej 1931/34. Sofia. 1936. 117–130. . "Une monnaie de Philippopolis avec la personification de la ville et des deux fleuves."BIABulg 17 (1950), 312–313.

Gianakaris, C.J. Plutarch. Twayne's World Authors Series 111. New York: Twayne, 1970. Gilliam, F.W. "Novius Priscus." BCH 91 (1967), 269–271. Ginouvès, René. "Une salle de bains hellénistique à Delphes." BCH 76 (1952), 541–561. . "Sur un aspect de l'évolution des bains en Grèce vers le IVe siècle de notre ère." BCH 79 (1955), 135–152.

Glass, Stephen L. "The Greek gymnasium: some problems." in The archaeology of the Olympics. ed. Wendy J. Raschke. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1988. 155–173. Gordon, B. "Grecian athletic training in the third century (A.D.)." Annals of medical history 7 (1935), 513–518. Graindor, Paul. "Les cosmètes du musée d'Athènes." BCH 39 (1915), 241–401. . "Les cosmètes du musée d'Athènes. Note additionnelle." BCH 40 (1916), 74–77.

. Athènes sous Auguste. Cairo: Imprimerie Misr, Société Anonyme Égyptienne, 1931(a).

. Athènes de Tibère à Trajan. Cairo: Imprimerie Misr, Société Anonyme Égyptienne, 1931(b).

. Athènes sous Hadrien. Cairo: Imprimerie Nationale, Boulac. 1934.

Greene, Kevin. The archaeology of the Roman economy. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1986. 219

Bibliography Grenfell, B.P. and A.S. Hunt, The Oxyrhynchus papyri. London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1899. Grierson, Philip and Melinda Mays. Catalogue of late Roman coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, 1992. Griffin, Miriam T. Nero. The end of a dynasty. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1984. Groag, E. "Atilius 29)." RE Suppl. 1 (1903), col. 222. . "Nonius 21)." RE 17.1 (1936), col. 874.

. Römische Reichsbeamten von Achaea bis auf Diokletian. I. Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien. Balkankommission Schriften. Antiquarische Abteilung IX. Vienna: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky AG, 1939.

Gsell, Stéphane. Essai sur le règne de l'empereur Domitien. Paris: Thorin & Fils, Éditeurs, 1894. Habicht, Christian. "Eine Urkunden des akarnanischen Bundes." Hermes 85 (1957), 86–122. . Pausanias' guide to ancient Greece. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1985.

Hansen, Bernhard. Rückläufiges Wörterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen. Berichte über die Verhandlungen der sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Philologisch-historische Klasse. Band 102, Heft 4. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1957. Hansen, Erik and Gregers Algreen-Ussing. Fouilles de Delphes. Tome II —Topographie et architecture: Sanctuaire d'Apollon. Atlas. Paris: Diffusion de Boccard, 1975. Hanslik, Rudolf. "Quinctilius 22)." RE 24.1 (1963a), 983–984. . "Quinctilius 27)." RE 24.1 (1963b), 986–987.

Harl, Kenneth W. Civic coins and civic politics in the Roman east, A.D. 180–275. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1987. Harmon, Daniel P. "The religious significance of games in the Roman age." The archaeology of the Olympics. (ed. Wendy J. Raschke). Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1988. 236–255. Hartke, W. "Neronia 2)." RE 17.1 (1936), 42–48. Haussoulier, B. "Comment avait lieu la consultation de l'oracle?" Rev. Phil. 44 (1920), 268–277. Herington, J. Poetry into drama. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1985. Herrmann, P. "Athena Polias in Milet." Chiron 1 (1971), 291–298. Hiesinger, U. "The portraits of Nero." AJA 79 (1975), 113–124. Holland, L.B. "The mantic mechanism at Delphi." AJA 37 (1933), 201–214. Homolle, Theodore. "Histoire du temple (fin)." BCH 20 (1896), 702–732. . "Nouvelles et Correspondence. Phthiotide." BCH 21 (1897a), 151–159.

. "Topographie de Delphes. II. –Les monuments: temples, trésors, offrandes diverses." BCH 21 (1897b), 274.

. "Ex-voto trouvés à Delphes. —7. Le trophée des Messéniens de Naupact." BCH 21 (1897c), 616–620.

. "Inscription de Delphes." BCH 22 (1898), 260–70.

. "Lysippe et l'ex–voto de Daochos." BCH 23 (1899a), 421–85.

. "Communications. Le gymnase de Delphes." BCH 23 (1899b), 560–583.

. "Le stade de Delphes." BCH 23 (1899c), 601–615. 220

Bibliography . "Signature commune de Ménécrates et Sopatros à Delphes." BCH 24 (1900), 81.

. "Inscriptions de Delphes. Locations des propriétés sacrées." BCH 25 (1901), 105–142.

. Fouilles de Delphes. Tome IV. —Monuments figurés, sculpture. 1. Art primitif, art archaïque du Péloponnèse et des îles. Paris: Fontemoing & Cie Éditeurs, 1909.

Honigmann, E. "Strabo 3)." RE, 2nd ser., 4A.1, (1931), cols. 76–155. Howgego, Christopher J. Greek Imperial countermarks. RNS Special Publication no. 17. London: Royal Numismatic Society, 1985. . "After the colt has bolted: A review of Amandry on Roman Corinth." NC 149 (1989), 199–208.

Hurwit, Jeffrey M. "Thespis aoiodos: A bronze harper from the James Coats collection." Yale University Art Gallery bulletin, 38.2 (1982), 18–23. Imhoof-Blumer, F.W. and Percy Gardner. Ancient coins illustrating lost masterpieces of Greek art: A numismatic commentary on Pausanias, ed. A.N. Oikonomides. Chicago: Argonaut Inc., Publishers, 1964. Iriarté, Ana. "La terre de Delphes." STHist 14 (1988), 3–15. Jacquemin, Anne. "Note sur la frise du théâtre de Delphes." BCH 109 (1985), 585–587. . "Delphes au IIe siècle après J.–C.: un lieu de la mémoire grecque." in ELLHNISMOS: quelques jalons pour une histoire de l'identité grecque. (Actes du colloque de Strasbourg, 25–27 octobre 1989). ed. Susan Saïd. Leiden and New York: E.J. Brill, 1990. 217–231.

Jacquemin, Anne and Didier Laroche. "Notes sur trois piliers delphiques." BCH 106 (1982), 192–204. . "Rapports sur les travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1985. Delphes. 2. —Piliers votifs." BCH 110 (1986), 783–789.

Jamot, P. "Fouilles de Thespies." BCH 26 (1902), 291–320. Jannoray, Jean. "À propos de deux dédicaces delphiques de l'époque impériale." BCH 60 (1936), 374–385. . "Le ‘gymnase du bas’ à Delphes." BCH 61 (1937), 53–56.

. "Qrivgkoi ejpi; sthvlai"." BCH 68–69 (1944–45), 75–93.

. "Notes sur la chronologie delphique du Ier siècle après J.-C." REA 47 (1945), 33–81.

. "Inscriptions delphiques d'époque tardive." BCH 70 (1946), 247–261.

Jannoray, Jean and Henri Ducoux. Fouilles de Delphes. Tome II —Topographie et architecture: Le gymnase. Paris: Éditions E. de Boccard, 1953. Jardé. "Inscriptions de Delphes. Actes amphictyoniques de la domination étolienne." BCH 26 (1902), 246–286. Jeffery, L.H. Archaic Greece. The city-states c. 700–500 B.C. London: Methuen and Co. Ltd., 1976. . The local scripts of Archaic Greece. A study of the origin of the Greek alphabet from the eighth to the fifth centuries B.C.2 suppl. by A.W. Johnston. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990.

Johnston, A.W. "IG II2 2311 and the number of Panathenaic amphorae." BSA 82 (1987), 125–129. Jones, A.H.M. The cities of the eastern Roman provinces.2 Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971. Jones, Brian W., The emperor Domitian. London and New York: Routledge. 1992. Jones, C.P. "The teacher of Plutarch." HSCP 71 (1966a), 205–213. . "Towards a chronology of Plutarch's works." JRS 56 (1966b), 61–74. 221

Bibliography . "A leading family of Roman Thespiai." HSCP 74 (1970), 223–255.

. Plutarch and Rome. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971.

. "Two friends of Plutarch." BCH 96 (1972), 263–267.

. The Roman world of Dio Chrysostom. Loeb classical monographs. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 1978.

. "A new Lycian dossier establishing an artistic contest and festival in the reign of Hadrian." JRA 3 (1990), 484–488.

Jones, Horace L. trans. The Geography of Strabo. vol. I. Loeb Classical Library. London: William Heinemann Ltd. New York: Harvard University Press, 1917. Jouanna, J. "Plutarque et la patine des statues à Delphes (Sur les oracles de la Pythie 395B–396C)." Rev. Phil. 49 (1975), 67–71. Joukowsky, Martha. A complete manual of field archaeology. Tools and techniques of field work for archaeologists. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1980. Jüthner, Julius. Philostratos über Gymnastik. Sammlung Wissenschaftlicher Kommentare zu Griechischen und Römischen Schriftstellern. Leipzig and Berlin: B.G. Teubner, 1909. Kalkmann, August. Pausanias der Perieget. Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1886. Kapetanopoulos, E. "Klea and Leontis; two ladies from Delphi." BCH 90 (1966), 119–130. Kennell, Nigel. "Nevrwn Periodonivkh"." AJPh 109 (1988), 239–251. Kent, John Harvey. Corinth. Volume VIII, part III. The inscriptions (1926-1950). Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1966. Keramopoullos, A.D. "∆Aristovtimo" oJ ijereu;" ejn Delfoi'"." BCH 35 (1911), 492–498; BCH 36 (1912), 494. Kidd, Ian Gray. "Posidonius (2)." OCD3, 1231–1232. Kinns, P. "The Amphictionic coinage reconsidered." NC 143 (1983), 1–22. Kirchner, J. "Agelaos 11)." RE 1.1 (1894), col. 770. Klee, Theophil. Zur Geschichte der gymnischen Agone an griechischen Festen. Leipzig and Berlin: Verlag von B.G. Teubner, 1918; rpt. Chicago: Ares Publishers Inc., 1980. Kleiner, Diana E.E. Roman sculpture. Yale Publications in the History of Art. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1992. Knab, Rudolf. Die Periodoniken. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der gymnischen Agone an den 4 griechischen Hauptfesten. Diss. Gießen, 1934. Knibbe, D. "Neue Inschriften aus Ephesos IV–VII." JÖAI 50 (1972–1975), Beiblatt, 1–79. . Forschungen in Ephesos IX.1.1. Der Staatsmarkt. Die Inschriften des Prytaneions. Die Kureteninschriften und sonstige religiöse Texte. Vienna: Schindler, 1981.

Kokolakis, Minos. "Intellectual activity on the fringes of the games." in Proceedings of an International Symposium on the Olympic Games. 5–9 September, 1988. eds. William Coulson and Helmut Kyrieleis. Athens: Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen, 1992. 153–158. Kolev, Kamen. "Kopien griechischer Skulpturen auf Münzen von Philippopolis." Klio 73 (1991), 510–525. Komninou, V. et al., "∆Eforei˘a proistorikw˘n kai klasikw˘n ajrcaioth˘twn Delfw˘n." ArchDelt 34 (1979), Chronika I, 200–207. Koumanoudis, S.N. "∆Epigrafai; ejx ∆Aqh'nwn." ArchDelt 25 (1970) A, 58–60. 222

Bibliography Kraft, Konrad. Das System der kaiserzeitlichen Munzprägung in Kleinasien, Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1972. Krause, Johann Heinrich. Theagenes, oder wissenschaftliche Darstellung der Gymnastik, Agonistik und Festspiele der Hellenen. Halle: Verfasser und Eduard Anton. 1835; rpt. Hildesheim and New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 1975. . Die Pythien, Nemeen und Isthmien aus den Schrift– und Bildwerken des Altertums. Leipzig: Verlag von Johann Ambrosius Barth. 1841; rpt. Hildesheim and New York: Georg Olms Verlag. 1975.

Kravartoyiannos, Drosos. "Katavlogo~ ÔRwmai>kw'n nomismavtwn eJllhnikw'n nomismatokopeivwn memonwmenw'n euJrhmavtwn ∆Amfivssh~." Tetravmhna 8–9 (1976a), 736–749. . "Katavlogo~ Ôrwmai>kw'n aujtokratorikw'n nomismavtwn euJrhmavtwn ∆Amfivssh~," Tetravmhna 8–9 (1976b), 824–829.

. "Calka' nomivsmata tw'n Fwkevwn euJrhvmato" ∆Elavteia"." Tetravmhna 23–24 (summer 1983), 1589–1596.

. "Calka' nomivsmata tw'n Aijtwlw'n euJrhvmato" ∆Amfivssh"." Tetravmhna 28–29 (summer 1985), 1979–1988.

. "Tucai'a nomismatika; euJrhvmata Galaxeidivou." Tetravmhna 43 (autumn 1990), 2849–2853.

Kraynak, L. Hostelries of ancient Greece. Diss. Berkeley, C.A. 1984. Kroll, John H. and Alan S. Walker. The Athenian Agora. Volume XXVI: The Greek coins. Princeton, N.J.: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1993. Kromann, Anne. "Marks of value on Greek Imperials from Side." in Kraay–Mørkholm Essays: Numismatic studies in memory of C.M. Kraay and O. Mørkholm. eds. Georges Le Rider et al. Louvain–la–Neuve: Institut supérieur d'archéologie et d'histoire de l'art, Séminaire de numismatique Marcel Hoc, 1989. 149–158. Kyle, Donald G. "Professionalism and elitism in Athenian athletics." in Proceedings. 5th Canadian symposium on the history of sport and physical education. (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. August 26–29, 1982). Toronto: University of Toronto, 1982. 42–51. . Athletics in ancient Athens. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1987.

. "The Panathenaic Games: sacred and civic athletics." Goddess and Polis. The Panathenaic festival in ancient Athens, ed. Jennifer Neils. Hanover, N.H. and Princeton, N.J.: Hood Museum of Art and the Princeton University Press, 1992.

Lacoste, H. Fouilles de Delphes. Tome II. —Topographie et architecture 2: La terrasse du temple. Premier fascicule. Planches: Relevés et restaurations, Paris: É de Boccard, Éditeur, 1920. Lacroix, L. "Les statues de la Grèce ancienne et le témoignage des monnaies." BCH 70 (1946), 288–298. Lacroix, Léon. "Les offrandes à l'Apollon de Delphes et le témoignage de Pausanias: du réel à l'imaginaire." BCH 116 (1992), 157–176. Lambrinudakis, Wassilis. "Apollon. Kommentar. A. Die frühe Zeit (Anfänge –um 450 v. Chr.)." LIMC 2.1 (1990), 314–318. Lämmer, H. Olympien und Hadrianeen im antiken Ephesos. Diss. Cologne. 1967. . "King Herod's endowment to the Olympic Games." in Proceedings of the second world symposium on the history of sport and physical education. Banff, Canada. 1971. 9–17.

Langdon, S. From pasture to polis: Art in the age of Homer. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993. Laroche, Didier and Marie-Dominique Nenna, "Le trésor de Sicyone et ses fondations." BCH 114 (1990), 241–284. Larsen, J.A.O. "A Thessalian family under the principate." CP (1953), 83–95. . "A new interpretation of the Thessalian confederacy." CP 55 (1960), 229–248.

223

Bibliography Lattanzi, E. "I ritratti dei cosmeti nel Museo Nazionale di Atene." Studia Archeologica 9. Rome: L'Erma di Bretschneider, 1968. Laurent, Marcel. "Inscriptions de Delphes. II. Décret amphictionique en l'honneur de Callistos de Cnide." BCH 25 (1901), 355–8. Lefèvre, François. "Remarques sur le calendrier des réunions de l'amphictionie pyléo–delphique." BCH 115 (1991), 579–594. LeGlay, Marcel. Villes, temples et sanctuaires de l'orient romain. Paris: Sedes. 1986. Lehmann, Gustav Adolf. "Der ‘Erste Heilige Krieg’ — eine Fiktion?" Historia 29 (1980), 242–246. Lemerle, P. "Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce." BCH 60 (1936), 463–465. Lerat, Lucien. "Chronique des fouilles en 1950. Delphes." BCH 75 (1951), 136–137. . "Les énigmes de Marmaria." BCH 109 (1985), 255–264.

Lévêque, Pierre. "Un fragment inédit de la frise du théâtre de Delphes." BCH 74 (1950), 224–232. . "La date de la frise du théâtre de Delphes." BCH 75 (1951), 247–263.

Levi, Peter trans. Pausanias. Guide to Greece. Volume 1: central Greece, Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin Books Ltd, 1971. Levick, B.M. "Domitian and the provinces." Latomus 41 (1982), 50–73. . The government of the Roman Empire: A sourcebook. London and Sydney: Croom Helm, 1985.

Levin, Saul. "The old Greek oracles in decline." ANRW 2.18.2 (1989), 1599–1642. Levy, Brooks E. "‘Nero at the Actian Games’: a different view." Gazette de la numismatique suisse 35 (1985), cahier 138, 37–41. . "Juppiter Liberator at Patrae and the Boy Zeus of Aigion." in Praktika; tou' CII Dievqnou" Sunedrivou Klasikh'" ∆Arcaiologiva", ∆Aqh'na, 4-10 Septembrivou 1983. vol. 2. Athens: Ministry of Culture, 1988. 131–135.

. "Nero's ‘Apollonia’ series: The Achaean context." NC 149 (1989), 59–68.

Luce, Jean-Marc. "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1992. Delphes. 1. —Fouille de l'aire du pilier des Rhodiens." BCH 117 (1993), 619–631. Maass, Michael. Das antike Delphi. Orakel, Schätze und Monumente. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1993. MacCormack, S.G. "The ceremony of adventus." Historia 21 (1972), 721–752. Macdonald, David J. Greek and Roman Coins from Aphrodisias. BAR Supplementary Series 9. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, 1976. . The coinage of Aphrodisias. Royal Numismatic Society Special Publication 23. London: Royal Numismatic Society, 1992.

MacIsaac, John D. "Corinth: 1925–1926. The theater district and the Roman villa." Hesperia 56 (1987), 97–157. MacMullen, Ramsay. Paganism in the Roman Empire. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1981. Marbach. "Sol 1)." RE 2nd ser., 3.1 (1927), cols. 901–913. Marcadé, Jean. Recueil des signaturesde sculpteurs grecs. vol. 1. Paris: de Boccard, 1953. McCrum, M. and A.G. Woodhead. Select documents of the principates of the Flavian emperors including the year of revolution A.D. 68-69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961. 224

Bibliography McDonagh, Bernard. Blue guide Turkey: The Aegean and Mediterranean coasts. London: A & C Black Limited, 1989. McGregor, Malcolm F. "Cleisthenes of Sicyon and the Panhellenic festivals." TAPA 72 (1941), 266–287. Merkelbach, R. "Agonistisches Epigramm aus Trapezopolis." ZPE 19 (1975), 301–302. Meyer, Hugo. Antinöos: die archäologischen Denkmäler unter Einbeziehung des numismatischen und epigraphischen Materials sowie der literarischen Nachrichten; ein Beitrag zur Kunst- und Kulturgeschichte der hadrianischfrühantoninischen Zeit. Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1991. Michaud, Jean-Pierre. "Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce en 1968 et 1969." BCH 94 (1970), 949–950. Mie, F. Quaestiones agonisticae imprimis ad Olympia pertinentes. Diss. Rostock. 1888. Millar, Fergus. The emperor in the Roman world (31 B.C. – A.D. 337). Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1977. Miller, Stella G. "Excavations at the Panhellenic site of Nemea: cults, politics, and games." in The archaeology of the Olympics. ed. Wendy J. Raschke. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. 1988. 141–151. Miller, Stephen G. "Excavations at Nemea, 1973–1974," Hesperia 44 (1975), 143–172. . "Excavations at Nemea, 1975." Hesperia 45 (1976), 174–202.

. "Excavations at Nemea, 1976." Hesperia 46 (1977), 1–31.

. "Excavations at Nemea, 1977." Hesperia 47 (1978), 58–88.

. "The date of the first Pythiad." CSCA 11 (1979), 127–158.

. "Excavations at Nemea, 1981." Hesperia 51 (1982), 19–40.

. Nemea: A guide to the site and museum. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and Oxford: University of California Press, 1990.

. Arete. Greek sports from ancient sources.2 Berkeley, Los Angeles, and Oxford: University of California Press. 1991.

Misdrachi-Kapon, Rachel. Qessaloni˘kh: ∆Apo˘ ta proi>storika˘ mecri˘ ta Cristianika˘ croni˘a. Athens: Archaiologiko Mouseio Thessalonikes, 1986. Mitchell, Stephen. "Festivals, games, and civic life in Roman Asia Minor." JRS 80 (1990), 183–193. . Anatolia: Land, men, and gods in Asia Minor. Volume 1: The Celts in Anatolia and the impact of Roman rule. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1993.

Moretti, Luigi. Iscrizioni agonistiche greche. Studi pubblicati dall' Istituto Italiano per la Storia Antica. Fascicolo dodicesimo. Rome: Angelo Signorelli editore. 1953. . "Olympionikai, i vincitori negli antichi agoni Olimpici." Mem. dei Lincei ser. 8, vol. 8, fasc. 2 (1957), 53–198.

. "Supplemento al catalogo degli Olympionikai." Klio 52 (1970), 295–303.

. "Nuovo supplemento al catalogo degli Olympionikai," Miscellanea Greca e Romana 12 (1987), 81–83.

Morgan, Catherine. Athletes and oracles. The transformation of Olympia and Delphi in the eighth century BC. Cambridge Classical Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Mosshammer, Alden A. "The date of the first Pythiad —again." GRBS 23.1 (1982), 15–30. Nachtergael, G. Les Galates en Grèce et les Soteria de Delphes. Mémoires de la Classe des Lettres. Collection in –8° –2e série, T.LXIII –Fascicule 1– 1977. Brussels: Académie Royale de Belgique, 1977. Nagy, B. "The Athenian athlothetai." GRBS 19 (1978), 307–313. 225

Bibliography Nash, E. Pictorial dictionary of ancient Rome. vol. 1. London: A. Zwemmer, 1961. Nollé, Johannes. "Pamphylische Studien, 6–10." Chiron 17 (1987), 235–265. . "Side: zur Geschichte einer kleinasiatischen Stadt in der römischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel ihrer Münzen." AntW 21 (1990), 244–265.

. Side im Altertum: Geschichte und Zeugnisse. Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien, Band 43.1. Bonn: R. Habelt, 1993.

Notopoulos, James A. "Studies in the chronology of Athens." Hesperia 18 (1949), 1–57. Ogilvie, R.M. "The date of the de defectu oraculorum." Phoenix 21 (1967), 108–119. Oldfather, W.A. "A friend of Plutarch's grandfather." CP 19 (1924), 177. Oliver, James H. "Greek inscriptions." Hesperia 11 (1942), 29–90. . The Athenian expounders of the sacred and ancestral law. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1950.

. "Philosophers and procurators, relatives of the Aemilius Iuncus of Vita Commodi 4,11." Hesperia 36 (1967), 42–56.

Oliver, James H. and P. Maas. "An ancient poem of the duties of a physician." Bulletin of the History of Medicine 7 (1939), 315–323. Oliver, James H. and Robert E.A. Palmer. "Minutes of an act of the Roman Senate." Hesperia 24 (1955), 320–349. Olivieri, A. Civiltà greca dell' Italia meridionale. Naples: Loffredo, 1931. Olmos, Ricardo and Luis J. Balmaseda. "Antaios I." LIMC 1.1 (1981), 801–804. Oppé, A.P. "The chasm at Delphi." JHS 24 (1904), 214–240. Padgett, J. Michael. "A Geometric bard." in The ages of Homer. eds. Jane B. Carter and Sarah P. Morris. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1995. Palagia, Olga. "Apollon. D. Apollon allein mit Kithara oder Lyra." LIMC 2.1 (1990), 199–213. von Papen. "Die Spiele von Hierapolis." ZfN 26 (1908), 161–182. Parke, H.W. "Pausanias' description of the temple of Delphi." Hermathena 24 (1935), 102–105. . "Delphica." Hermathena 28 (1939a), 59–78.

. A history of the Delphic oracle. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1939(b).

. "A note on the Delphic priesthood." CQ 34 (1940), 85–89.

. "The days for consulting the Delphic oracle." CQ 37 (1943), 19–22.

Parsons, Arthur W. "Klepsydra and the paved court of the Pythion." Hesperia 12 (1943), 191–267. Pelling, C.B.R. "Alexander (11) ‘Polyhistor’." OCD3, 60. Pentazos, Evangelos. "To; gumnavsio." Fwvkika Crovnika 4 (1992), 116–125. Pentazos, Evangelos et al. "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1985. Delphes. 1.—Le xyste." BCH 110 (1986), 774–782. . "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1987. Delphes. Le xyste." BCH 112 (1988), 722–725.

Pentazos, Evangelos and François Queyrel, "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1990. Delphes. 5.—Le xyste." BCH 115 (1991), 702–711. 226

Bibliography Pentazos, Evangelos and Evangelia Trouki. "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1993. Delphes. 2.—Gymnase." BCH 118 (1994), 428–434. . "Travaux de l'École Française en Grèce en 1994. Delphes. 3. —Gymnase." BCH 119 (1995), 650–654.

Perdrizet, Paul. "Les bas–reliefs du théâtre de Delphes." BCH 21 (1897), 600–603. . Fouilles de Delphes. Tome V: Monuments figurés: Petits bronzes. —Terres cuites. —Antiquités diverses. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1908.

. "Fragment delphique de l'édit de Dioclétien." BCH 22 (1898), 403–9.

Pickard-Cambridge, A.W. The dramatic festivals of Athens2 eds. J. Gould and D.M. Lewis. 1968. Piganiol, A. "La date du troisième incendie de Delphes." REA 39 (1937), 108–110. Plassart, André. "La liste des théarodoques." BCH 45 (1921), 1–85. . "Fouilles de Thespies et de l'hiéron des muses de l'Hélicon. Inscriptions (6e article)." BCH 50 (1926), 383–462.

. Fouilles de Delphes. Tome II —Topographie et architecture: Le stade. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1970.

Platner, M. and T. Ashby, A topographical dictionary of ancient Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1929. Pleket, Henri W. "Some aspects of the history of the athletic guilds." ZPE 10 (1973), 197–227. . "Zur Soziologie des antiken Sports," Mededelingen van het Nerderlands Instituut te Rome, n.s. 36 (1974), 56–87.

. "Games, prizes, athletes, and ideology." Stadion 1.1 (1975), 49–89.

. "Olympic benefactors." ZPE 20 (1976), 1–18.

. "The participants in the ancient Olympic Games: Social background and mentality." in Proceedings of an International Symposium on the Olympic Games. 5–9 September, 1988. eds. William Coulson and Helmut Kyrieleis. Athens: Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen, 1992. 147–152.

Poliakoff, Michael B. Combat sports in the ancient world: Competition, violence, and culture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. Pomtow, H. "Delphische Neufunde. II: Neue delphische Inschriften." Klio 15 (1916a), 1–77. . "Delphische Neufunde. III: Hippokrates und die Asklepiaden in Delphi." Klio 15 (1916b), 303–338.

Pouilloux, Jean. Recherches sur l'histoire et les cultes de Thasos. I: De la fondation de la cité à 196 B.C. av. J.-C. Paris: Boccard, 1954. . Fouilles de Delphes Tome II —Topographie et architecture: La région nord du sanctuaire. Paris: Éditions E. de Boccard. 1960. 89–90

. "L'air de Delphes et la patine de bronze." REA 67.1–2 (1965), 54–66.

. "Une famille de sophistes thessaliens à Delphes au IIème s. ap. J.C." REG 80 (1967), 379–384.

. "Delphes et les Romains," REA 73, 1–2 (1971), 374–381.

. "Delfoiv." in ÔIstoriva tou' ÔEllhnikou' “Eqnou". Tovmo" ST v. (30 p.C. – 324 m.C.) ÔEllhnismo;" kai; ÔRwmhv. Athens: ∆Ekdotikh; ∆Aqhnw'n A. E., 1976(a). 176–179.

. "Chypriotes à Delphes." RDAC 1976(b), 158–167.

. "Travaux à Delphes à l'occasion des Pythia." in Études Delphiques. BCH Suppl. IV. Paris: Diffusion de Boccard, 1977. 103–123. 227

Bibliography . "Les épimelètes des Amphictions: tradition delphique et politique romaine." Mélanges de littérature et d'épigraphie latines, d'histoire ancienne et d'archéologie. Hommage à la mémoire de Pierre Wuilleumier. Paris: Société d'Édition les Belles Lettres, 1980(a). 281–299.

. "Delphes et les Romains." in STHLH, Tovmo" eij" mnhvmh Nikolavou Kontolevonto". Athens: To somateion ton philon tou Nikolaou Kontoleontos, 1980(b). 201–207.

. "Delphes dans les Éthiopiques d'Héliodore: La réalité dans la fiction." Journal des Savants 1983, 259–286.

. "Roman grec et réalité: un épisode delphique des Éthiopique d'Héliodore." in Hommages à Lucien Lerat. ed. Hélène Walter. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1984. 691–702.

Pouilloux, Jean and Georges Roux Énigmes à Delphes. Paris: Éditions E. de Boccard, 1963. Poulsen, Frederik. "Portrait d'un philosophe neoplatonicien trouvé à Delphes." BCH 52 (1928), 245–255. Poulsen, Vagn H. Les portraits romains. II. De Vespasien à la basse antiquité. Copenhagen: Glyptothèque Ny Carlsberg, 1974. Price, S.R.F. Rituals and power: The Roman imperial cult in Asia Minor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Puech, Bernadette. "Soclaros de Tithorée, ami de Plutarque, et ses descendants." REG 94 (1981), 186–192. Purcell, Nicholas. "Strabo." OCD3, 1447. Queyrel, François. "Inscriptions peintes découvertes dans le xyste du gymnase de Delphes." REG 99 (1986), p. xx. . "Les acclamations des inscriptions peintes du xyste." in Delphes. Centenaire de la «Grande Fouille» réalisée par l'École Française d'Athènes (1892–1903). ed. Jean-François Bommelaer. Université des sciences humaines de Strasbourg. Travaux du centre de recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Grèce Antiques 12. Leiden, New York, Copenhagen, and Cologne: E.J. Brill, 1992. 333–348.

Raubitschek, A.E. "Commodus and Athens." in Commemorative studies in honor of Theodore Leslie Shear. Hesperia Supplement VIII. Princeton, N.J.: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1949. 280–283. Raubitschek, A.E. and Lilian H. Jeffery eds. Dedications from the Athenian Acropolis: A catalogue of the inscriptions of the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. Cambridge, MA: Archaeological Institute of America, 1949. del Re, Raffaelo. Il dialogo sull'estinzione degli oracoli di Plutarco da Cheronea. Naples: Alberto Morano, 1934. Renfrew, Jane M. "Food for athletes and gods: a classical diet." inThe archaelogy of the Olympics. ed. Wendy J. Raschke. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. 1988. 174–181. Reynolds, Joyce M. Aphrodisias and Rome: Documents from the excavations of the theatre of Aphrodisias conducted by professor Kenan T. Erim, together with some related texts. JRS Monograph 1. London: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies, 1982. Richter, Gisela M.A. Portraits of the Greeks. 3 vols. London: Phaidon Press Ltd., 1965. te Riele, G.-J.M.-J. "Inscriptions conservées au Musée d'Olympie." BCH 88 (1964), 169–195. Rigsby, K.J. "Megara and Tripodiscus." GRBS 28 (1987), 93–102. Ringwood-Arnold, I.C. Agonistic features of local Greek festivals chiefly from inscriptional evidence I. Diss. Columbia University, New York. 1927. Rizakis, A.D. "La colonie romaine de Patras en Achaie: le témoignage épigraphique." The Greek renaissance in the Roman Empire: papers from the tenth British Museum classical colloquium. (Bulletin Supplement 55). London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1989. 180–186. Robert, Jeanne and Louis. Bulletin épigraphique. 10 vols. Paris: Les Belles lettres, 1938–1984. Robert, Louis. "Notes d'épigraphie hellénistique." BCH 52 (1928a), 158–178. 228

Bibliography . "Études épigraphiques. Première série." BCH 52 (1928b), 407–425.

. "Décrets de Delphes." BCH 53 (1929a), 34–41.

. "Études d'épigraphie grecque VII – XX." RPhil. 3 (1929b), 131–135.

. "Epigraphica." REG 42 (1929c), 433–438.

. "Notes d'épigraphie hellénistique." BCH 54 (1930a), 322–351.

. "Études d'épigraphie grecque." RPhil (1930b), 49–60.

. "Numismatique et épigraphie grecques." RA (1934), 58–61.

. Études anatoliennes. Paris: E. de Boccard, Éditeur, 1937.

. Études épigraphiques et philologiques. Paris: Édouard Champion, 1938.

. "Un édifice du sanctuaire de l'Isthme dans une inscription de Corinth." Hellenica 1 (1940), 43–53.

. "Les hellénodiques à Éphèse." Hellenica 5 (1948), 59–63.

. "Monnaie d'Ionie." Hellenica 7 (1949a), 84–85.

. "Les boules dans les types monétaires agonistiques." Hellenica 7 (1949b), 93–104.

. "Inscriptions et reliefs à Ankara." Hellenica 9 (1950), 67–77.

. "Décret de Delphes pour un médecin de Coronée." BCH 78 (1954), 68–73.

. "Épitaphe d'un comédien à Messine." Hellenica 11–12 (1960), 330–342.

. "Deux inscriptions agonistiques de Rhodes." ArchEph 1966, 108–118.

. "Sur des inscriptions d'Éphèse: Fêtes, athlètes, empereurs, rois. 5. Inscriptions des Olympia d'Éphèse." RPhil 1967, 40–44.

. Opera minora selecta. 7 vols. Amsterdam: Adolf A. Hakkert, 1969–1990.

. "Une inscription honorifique de Delphes." ArchEph 1969, 49–58.

. "Deux concours grecs à Rome." CRAI 1970, 6–27.

. "Les femmes théores à Éphèse." CRAI 1974, 176–181.

. "Deux inscriptions de l'époque impériale en Attique." AJP 100 (1979), 153–165.

Robertson, Noel. "The fiction of the First Sacred War." CQ 28 (1978), 38–73. Robbins, F.E. "The lot oracle at Delphi." Philology 11 (1916), 278–292. Rogers, Guy M. "Demosthenes of Oenoanda and models of euergetism." JRS 81 (1991), 91–100. von Rohden, P. "Aemilius 54)." RE 1.1 (1894), col. 550. . "Atilius 29)." RE 2.2 (1896), col. 2079.

Romano, David G. "An early stadium at Nemea."Hesperia 46 (1977), 27–31. Rose, V. ed. Aristotelis qui ferebantur librorum fragmenta. Leipzig: Teubner, 1886; rpt. Stuttgart: 1967. Ross, William David. "Diogenianus (1)." OCD3, 475. Roueché, C. "Rome, Asia and Aphrodisias in the third century." JRS 71 (1981), 103–120. Roussel, P. "Delphes et l'amphictionie après la guerre d'Aitolie." BCH 56 (1932), 1–32. 229

Bibliography Rousset, Denis. "Autour de Delphes: Territoire d'Apollon et territoire de la cité." REG 1991, xv–xvii. Roux, Georges. Rapport Dph 3.51. Personal reports to Georges Daux, director of the École Française d'Athènes. April–June, 1950. . Delphes, son oracle et ses dieux. Paris: Belles Lettres, 1976.

. L'amphictionie, Delphes et le temple d'Apollon au IVe siècle. Collection de la Maison de l'Orient Méditerranéen No 8. Série Archéologique 6. Lyon: Maison de l'Orient, 1979.

. "À propos des gymnases de Delphes et de Délos. Le site du damatrion de Delphes et le sens du mot sphairistérion." BCH 104 (1980), 127–149.

le Roy, Christian. Fouilles de Delphes. Tome II —Topographie et architecture: Les terres cuites architecturales. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1967 Russell, D.A.F.M. Plutarch. Classical Life & Letters. London: Duckworth. 1973. Russell, James. "New inscriptions from Anemourion." Phoenix 27 (1973), 319–327. Rutgers, J.R. ed. Sexti Iulii Africani Olympiadôn anagraphê. Leyden. 1862; rpt. Chicago: Ares, 1980. Saatsoglou–Paliadeli, Chryssoula. "The dedication of Krateros at Delphi. Problems of reconstruction." Egnatia 1 (1989), 79–100. Sacks, Kenneth S. "Ephorus." OCD3, 529–530. Íëahin, Sencer. Katalog der antiken Inschriften des Museums von Iznik (Nikaia). Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien, Band 10.3, Teil II.3. Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmBH, 1987. Salowey, C.A. "Herakles and the waterworks: Mycenaean dams, Classical fountains, Roman aqueducts." in Archaeology in the Peloponnese: New excavations and research. ed. Kenneth A. Sheedy. Oxford: Oxbow Press, 1994. Salviat, François. "Le navire Argô sur les métopes sicyoniennes à Delphes." Archaeonautica 4 (1984), 213–222. Sánchez, Pierre. L'amphictionie des Pyles et de Delphes. Historia Einzelschriften Heft 148. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2001. Sandys, Sir John. The odes of Pindar, including the principal fragments.2 Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. London: William Heinemann Ltd, 1978. Sarikakis, T.C. "“Aktia ta; ejn Nikovpolei." ArchEph 1965, 145–162. Schachter, Albert. "Cabiri." OCD3, 267. Schmidt, Johanna. "Phonaskoi." RE 20.1 (1941), 522–526. Schönert-Geiss, Edith. Die Münzprägung von Perinthos. vol. 1. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1965. Schrader, H. Die archaischen Marmorbildwerke der Akropolis. vol. 3. Frankfurt: Klostermann, 1939. Schröder, Stephan. Plutarchs Schrift De Pythiae oraculis: Text, Einleitung, und Kommentar. Beiträge zur Altertumskunde, Bd. 8. Stuttgart: B.G. Teubner, 1990. Schwartz. "Alexandros 88)." RE 1.2 (1894), col. 1450. Schween, P.G.H. Die Epistaten des Agons und der Palaestra in Literatur und Kunst. Diss. Kiel. 1911. Scott, K. The imperial cult under the Flavians. Stuttgart and Berlin: Kohllhammer, 1936. Sear, David R. Greek imperial coins and their values: The local coinages of the Roman Empire. London: B.A. Seaby Ltd, 1982.

230

Bibliography Shapiro, H.A. "Mousikoi agones: Music and poetry at the Panathenaia." in Goddess and Polis. The Panathenaic festival in ancient Athens, ed. Jennifer Neils. Hanover, N.H. and Princeton, N.J.: Hood Museum of Art and the Princeton University Press, 1992. 53–75. Sherk, Robert K. Roman documents from the Greek East: Senatus consulta and epistulae to the age of Augustus. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1967. Sissa, G. "Sur les oracles de la Pythie." GH 7–8 (1983), 117–127. Smith, R.R.R. Aphrodisias 1: The Monument of C. Iulius Zoilos. Mainz am Rhein: P. von Zabern, 1993. Smith, William ed. A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. vol. 1. London: John Murray, 1890. Sokolowski, F. "Sur le péan de Philodamos." BCH 60 (1936), 135–143. . Lois sacrées des cités grecques. BCH Supplément. Paris: Éditions E. de Boccard, 1962.

Spawforth, A.J.S. "The Olympia Kommodeia." ABSA 81 (1986), 327–332. . "Agonistic festivals in Roman Greece." in The Greek renaissance in the Roman Empire. eds. Susan Walker and Averil Cameron. Bulletin Supplement 55. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1989. 193–197.

Spawforth, A.J.S. and Walker, Susan. "The world of the Panhellenion. I. Athens and Eleusis." JRS 75 (1985), 78–104. . "The world of the Panhellenion. II. Three Dorian cities." JRS 76 (1986), 88–105.

. Hellenistic and Roman Sparta: a tale of two cities. London and New York: Routledge. 1989.

Spoerri, Walter. "Épigraphie et littérature: à propos de la liste des Pythioniques à Delphes." in Comptes et inventaires dans la cité grecque. Actes du colloque international d'épigraphie tenu à Neuchâtel du 23 au 26 septembre 1986 en l' honneur de Jacques Tréheux. ed. Denis Knoepfler. Faculté des Lettres, Université de Neuchâtel XL. Geneva: Droz, 1988. 111–140. Stählin. "ÔH ÔUpavta." RE 9.1 (1914), cols. 236–240. Stefanis, I.E. "Periodoneivkh"." ÔEllhnikav 39 (1988), 270–290. Stein, O. "Terentius 63)." RE 2nd ser., 5.1 (1934), cols. 667–668. . "Petraeus." RE 19.1 (1937), col. 1179.

Strasser, Jean-Yves. "Choraules et pythaules d'époque impériale. À propos d'inscriptions de Delphes." BCH 122 (2002), 97–142. Stuart, Meriweather. "How were Imperial portraits distributed throughout the Roman Empire?"AJA 43 (1939), 601–617. Sturgeon, Mary C. Corinth. Volume IX, part II. Sculpture: The reliefs from the theatre. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1977. . "A new monument to Herakles at Delphi." AJA 82 (1978), 226–235.

. "Roman sculptures from Corinth and Isthmia: a case for a local ‘workshop’." in The Greek renaissance in the Roman Empire: Papers from the tenth British Museum classical colloquium. eds. Susan Walker and Averil Cameron. Bulletin Supplement 55. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1989. 114–121.

Süssenbach, Uwe. Der Frühhellenismus in griechischen Kampf–Relief: Versuch einer Rekonstruktion der Stilentwicklung vom Mausoleum Halikarnassos bis zum Grossen Alterfries. Bonn: Bouvier, 1971. Svoronos, Ioannis N. "Nomismatikh˘ twn Delfw˘n." BCH 20 (1896), 1–54. Swain, Simon. "Plutarch, Hadrian, and Delphi." Historia 40.3 (1991), 318–330. 231

Bibliography Syme, Ronald. Anatolica.Studies in Strabo. ed. Anthony Birley. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. Szanto, E. "Agonothetes."RE 1.1 (1894), cols. 870–877. Szeliga, George N. "The composition of the Argo metopes from the monopteros at Delphi." AJA 90 (1986), 297–305. Tacchella, A. "Numismatique de Philippopolis." RN 1902, 174–178. Tausend, Klaus. "Die Koalitionen im 1. heiligen Krieg." Rivista storica dell' antichità 16 [1986], 49–66. Tidman, B.M. "On the foundation of the Actian Games." CQ 44 (1950), 123–125. Tod, Marcus N. "Sidelights on Greek philosophers." JHS 77 (1957), 132–141. Tomlinson, R.A. Epidauros. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1983. Toomer, G.J. "Hipparchus." OCD3, 708. Touratsoglou, Yiannis. Die Munzstätte von Thessaloniki in der römischen Kaiserzeit. AMUGS XII. Berlin and New York: W. de Gruyter, 1988. Tréheux, Jacques. "Une nouvelle lecture de l'inventaire du gymnase à Délos." BCH 112 (1988), 583–589. Tsontchev, D. Contributions à l'histoire du stade antique de Philippopolis. Sofia. 1947. Tzachou-Alexandri, Olga ed. Mind and body: Athletic contests in ancient Greece. Athens: Ministry of Culture, 1989. Valavanis, P. "∆Arcai'o~ puvrgo~ stou;~ Delfouv~." ∆Arcaiognwsiva 1 (1980), 331–343. Vallois, R. "Les strophes mutilées du péan de Philodamos." BCH 55 (1931), 241–364. . L'architecture hellénique et hellénistique à Delos. Paris. 1966.

Vatin, Claude. "Damiurges et epidamiurges à Delphes." BCH 85 (1961), 236–255. . "Les empereurs du IVe siècle à Delphes." BCH 86 (1962), 229–241.

. Delphes à l'époque imperiale. Diss. Sorbonne, Paris. 1965.

. "Un tarif des poissons à Delphes." BCH 90 (1966), 274–280.

. "Ordres et classes dans les institutions delphiques," in Recherches sur les structures sociales dans l'antiquité classique. Caen 25–26 avril 1969. Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1970(a). 259–263.

. "Notes d'épigraphie delphique." BCH 94 (1970b), 675–697.

. "Monuments votifs de Delphes. IV Le portique de Tégée." BCH 105 (1981), 453–459.

de Velasco, Francisco Díez. "Nessos." LIMC 6.1 (1992), 839–845. Vermeule, Cornelius C. "Neon Ilion and Ilium Novum: Kings, soldiers, citizens, and tourists at Classical Troy." in The ages of Homer. A tribute to Emily Townsend Vermeule. eds. Jane B. Carter and Sarah P. Morris. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1995. 467–482. Vernière, Yvonne. "La théorie de l'inspiration prophétique dans les dialogues pythiques de Plutarque." Kernos 3 (1990), 359–366. Vetter, Walther. "Terpandros." RE 2nd ser., 5.1 (1934), 785–786. Vollgraff, M.V. "Le péan delphique à Dionysos." BCH 48 (1924), 97–208; BCH 49 (1925), 101–142; BCH 50 (1926), 263–304; BCH 51 (1927), 423–468. Warmington, Eric Herbert. "Polemon (3)." OCD3, 1204. 232

Bibliography Weil, Henri. "Un péan delphique à Dionysos." BCH 19 (1895), 393–418; BCH 21 (1897), 510–513. Weir, Robert. "Nero and the Herakles Frieze at Delphi." BCH 123 (1999), 399–406. Weiss, P. "Ein agonistisches Bema und die isopythischen Spiele von Side." Chiron 11 (1981), 315–346. Weller, C.H. "The evidence for Strabo's travels in Greece." AJA 10 (1906), 84. West, Allen Brown. Corinth. Volume VIII, part II. Latin inscriptions, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931. West, M.L. "Rhapsodes." OCD3, 1311–1312. Wilhelm, A. "Siegerlisten aus Athen." MDAI(A) 30 (1905), 213–219. Will, E. "Sur la terre du pneuma delphique." BCH 66–67 (1942–1943), 161–175. Willers, Dietrich. "The redesigning of Athens under Hadrian." The Greek renaissance in the Roman Empire: papers from the tenth British Museum classical colloquium. eds. Susan Walker and Averil Cameron. Bulletin Supplement 55. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1989. 9. Wissowa, Georg. "Capitolia." RE 3.2 (1899), cols. 1527–1529. Wörrle, M. Stadt und Fest in kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien: Studien zu einer agonistischen Stiftung aus Oinoanda. Vestigia. Beiträge zur Alte Geschichte XXXIX. Munich: C.H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1988. Yekutieli, J. "Herod, the king of Jerusalem, prevents the decline of the ancient Olympic Games." Report of the sixth summer session on the International Olympic Academy. Athens. 1967. 156–158. Young, David C. The Olympic myth of Greek amateur athletics. Chicago: Ares Publishers, Inc., 1984. Ziegler, Konrat. "Theon 10)."RE 5A.2 (1934), cols. 1059–1066. . "Plutarchos von Chaironeia." RE 21.1 (1951), cols. 636–962.

. "Polybios." RE 21.2 (1953), cols. 1440–1578.

. "Pythokritos 2)," RE 24.1 (1963), cols. 601–602.

Ziegler, R. Stadtisches Prestige und kaiserliche Politik. Studien zum Festwesen in Ostkilikien im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. Düsseldorf: Schwann, 1985. Zschietzschmann, W. Wettkampf- und Übungsstätten in Griechenland. 2 vols. Stuttgart: Hofmann, 1960–1961.

233